Waqf Act 2025: Supreme Court asks Centre to maintain status quo till May 5 after its assurance

The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Centre to maintain status quo and not appoint non-Hindus to state waqf boards and Central Waqf Council after its assurance that it won’t do any such appointments nor denotify existing court-declared waqfs until the next hearing, which is due on May 5.

The assurance was given by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to the three-judge bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justice PV Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Viswanathan, while the batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf Act 2025.

The Apex Court further granted the Centre seven days to file a short reply on the petitions.

“During the course of hearing, SG Mehta states that the respondents would like to file a short reply within 7 days and assured that till the next date no appointment shall take place to the board and councils under the 2025 Act. He also assures that waqfs, including waqf by user already declared by notification or gazetted, their status shall not be changed,” the Court noted in its order.

The Court granted the government seven days to file its response to the prayer for stay of the provisions of the Act.

The petitioners were granted five additional days to file their rejoinder and the matter was listed for May 5 to decide on the interim prayer.

The top court of the country said that it would only issue directions and pass interim orders, if any, on that date.

The Apex Court today said that it would only hear five of the petitioners’ counsel on the next date of hearing. It granted liberty to the petitioners to decide which of the five among them should be heard.

The Bench added that other petitions would be treated as applications in the five petitions and would be disposed of.

More than 70 odd petitions are currently pending before the Court against the Waqf Acts.

The top court of the country said the case would henceforth be known as In Re: Waqf Amendment Act and not by the name of any of the petitioners.

It further asked both sides to decide on nodal counsel who shall coordinate with the parties and the Bench on filings & other communication between the bar and the bench.