The Supreme Court of India has deferred its interim decision on the challenges to the Waqf Act, 2025, extending the hearing to May 5. The postponement follows the Central Government's request for more time to provide an affidavit in defense of the law. The Centre has also assured the court that it will not appoint non-Muslims to Waqf boards or alter the status of any Waqf property until the next hearing.

Key elements of the case include the following:

• Nature of the Challenge: A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna is addressing nearly 65 petitions that dispute the validity of the Waqf Act, 2025. Prominent figures from various political parties, including Asaduddin Owaisi from All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen and Mahua Moitra from TMC, are among the petitioners.

• Arguments Presented: The main argument against the Act is that it violates Article 26 of the Indian Constitution, which safeguards the freedom to manage religious affairs. The petitioners claim that the Parliament's intervention disrupts the essential components of the Muslim faith's management.

• Concerns Over Waqfby-Use: One critical concern pertains to the Act's removal of the concept of “Waqf by use,” which had allowed land historically used for Muslim religious purposes to be classified as Waqf, even if not formally registered. The petitioners argue that many properties, including mosques, may lose their religious status, and express doubts about the feasibility of registering such lands.

• Powers of District Collectors: The court is also evaluating the ramifications of the 2025 law granting district collectors the power to designate currently used Waqf land as government property, which could prematurely alter its status before any judicial determination.

• Inclusion of Non-Muslims in Waqf Boards: Another focal issue is the law's allowance for non-Muslims to serve on Waqf boards. The petitioners argue this violates constitutional provisions that ensure Muslim communities can manage their own religious affairs. The Chief Justice raised pointed questions about the precedent this could set for the inclusion of individuals from other faiths in community-specific management.

• Limitation Act Provisions: The petition also challenges the Act's reintroduction of the Limitation Act's timeframe for legal claims regarding Waqf properties, which previously had no such restrictions based on the older 1995 Waqf Act. The implications of this change could hinder timely action against unauthorized land encroachments.

Overall, the Supreme Court's deliberation and the ensuing discussions illustrate significant concerns about the potential implications of the Waqf Act, 2025, especially regarding the management and preservation of Waqf properties and the autonomy of the Muslim community.

Important Points:

• Supreme Court has deferred the interim decision on the Waqf Act, 2025 to May 5.
• The Centre has requested time to present its affidavit and has assured it will not make appointments or changes to Waqf status until the case is heard.
• A three-judge Bench is addressing nearly 65 petitions challenging the law, with various prominent petitioners involved.
• The Act alters the legal concept of “Waqf by use,” potentially affecting many historic religious lands.
• The law provides district collectors the power to designate Waqf land as government property, raising concerns about preemptive status changes.
• Inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf boards is seen as a violation of constitutional rights regarding the management of religious affairs.
• The Act reintroduces time limitations on legal claims regarding Waqf properties that were previously exempt.

The Supreme Court of India has raised concerns regarding the amended Waqf Act, particularly focusing on the abolition of the concept of "Waqf by use." The central government has assured the court that no waqf properties will be denotified until the next hearing, addressing potential implications of the Act.

Key Points:

• Concept of Waqf by Use: This allows properties to be considered Waqf through long-term usage for charitable or religious purposes, even without an official declaration (Waqfnama).
• Defining Characteristics:
  • Long-term Usage: A property’s sustained use for religious or charitable aims over time is vital for its designation as Waqf.
  • Implied Dedication: Even without formal documentation, properties used for religious purposes, like mosques, can be recognized as Waqf based on usage.
• Concerns with the Amended Act: The removal of the “Waqf by use” provision leaves properties vulnerable to government interference, as these require formal acknowledgment through Waqfnama, which many historical properties do not have.
• Arguments from Petitioners:
  • Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal highlighted the impracticality of demanding formal Waqf deeds for properties created long ago (up to 300 years).
  • Commentators suggest that almost half of the eight lakh Waqf properties are classified as 'Waqf by use.'
• Judicial Response: Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna recognized the challenges of providing official documentation for historical sites, like mosques from the 14th or 15th centuries, which were established before modern property laws were instituted.

As the issue unfolds, it encompasses broader themes of religious properties' legal status, historical frameworks influencing modern legislation, and the intersection of religious practices with contemporary legal challenges. This ongoing dialogue between the judiciary and government showcases the complexity of maintaining heritage while adhering to legal standards.

The Andhra Pradesh Cabinet has approved a draft ordinance to implement sub-categorisation among Scheduled Castes (SC) in the state, aiming to establish 'reservations within reservations' based on the backwardness of various sub-castes. This move follows a Supreme Court ruling that permits states to subclassify SCs, empowering the Andhra Pradesh government to address the differing needs of various communities. The initiative will provide tailored reservations in education, government jobs, and local elected bodies according to the social and financial conditions of each sub-caste, rather than a broad-based reservation.

Key Developments:

• Cabinet Approval: The Andhra Pradesh Cabinet approved a draft ordinance proposed by the Social Welfare Department to sub-categorise Scheduled Castes.
• Supreme Court Backing: This initiative follows a Supreme Court verdict allowing states to implement sub-categorisation of SCs.
• Commission Formation: On November 15, 2024, the government established a commission led by retired IAS officer Rajeev Ranjan Mishra to study the issue, which conducted public feedback across the state.
• Report Submission: The commission submitted a comprehensive report on March 10, which was unanimously adopted in the Legislative Council and Assembly, leading to the drafting of the ordinance.

Purpose of SC Sub-categorisation:

• Leaders of SCs and other backward classes argue that reservations should be based on the specific needs and numerical strength of sub-castes.
• The Madiga community, represented by MRPS chief Manda Krishna Madiga, has emphasized the need for a fair distribution of benefits, as they believe that the Mala community currently receives the majority of reservation advantages.

Recommendations of the Commission:

• The commission proposed dividing SCs into 59 sub-groups classified into three categories:
  • Group 1 (Most Backward): Relli sub-group, including various lesser-known sub-castes, receiving a reservation of 1%.
  • Group 2 (Backward): 18 Madiga sub-groups, receiving 6.5% reservation.
  • Group 3 (Less Backward): 29 Mala sub-groups, receiving 7.5% reservation.

Reservation Distribution Example:

• For 100 government jobs available:
  • 8 positions for the Mala community
  • 6 for Madigas
  • 1 for Rellis
• For 200 jobs:
  • 15 for Malas
  • 13 for Madigas
  • 2 for Rellis

Expected Outcomes:

• The ordinance aims to promote equitable progress among all SC communities in Andhra Pradesh.
• The Social Welfare Minister, Dr. Dola Veeranjaneya Swamy, stated that the ordinance's main objective is to ensure the integrated and equal advancement of all Scheduled Caste communities in society.

Important Points:

• The sub-categorisation is designed to enhance the representation and benefits of diverse SC groups in various societal sectors.
• The initiative reflects a broader commitment to address historical inequities and promote social justice for disadvantaged communities within the Scheduled Castes.

In summary, the ordinance reflects Andhra Pradesh’s commitment to refining the reservation system to better serve the specific needs of various SC sub-groups, ultimately aiming for a more equitable and inclusive society.

The Supreme Court of India made significant remarks regarding the use of the Urdu language in a case titled Varshatai w/o Sanjay Bagade vs. State of Maharashtra. This decision marks a crucial endorsement of India's commitment to linguistic diversity amidst rising societal divides.

Summary:

• The Supreme Court supported the use of Urdu on a municipal signboard in Maharashtra, addressing a petition that challenged its usage.
• The Court refuted the notion that Urdu is not an inherent part of India, stating, “The prejudice against Urdu stems from the misconception that Urdu is alien to India."
• Urdu is classified as an Indo-Aryan language, similar to Marathi and Hindi, born in the Indian subcontinent.
• The ruling emphasizes the constitutional right to linguistic diversity and recognizes Urdu's role in the country’s rich cultural heritage.
• The language has faced increasing scrutiny and pushback; for instance, Urdu was excluded from a list of languages for the translation of Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly proceedings despite being prevalent in the state.
• A notable incident occurred in 2021 when Fabindia withdrew an advertisement featuring the Urdu phrase "Jashn-e-Riwaaz," following backlash from right-wing Hindu groups.
• The Court highlighted Urdu's origins in diverse cultural interactions, underscoring its significance in the syncretic (Ganga-Jamuni) cultural fabric of northern and central India.
• The language has also made substantial contributions to both literature and political consciousness.
• According to the 2011 Census, Urdu speakers are not limited to northern India; significant populations are present in Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, and Karnataka.
• Specifically, Maharashtra has approximately 75.4 lakh Urdu speakers, and Karnataka boasts a notable 10.83% of its population as Urdu speakers, indicating a broader cultural reach.
• “Language is not religion. Language does not even represent religion. Language belongs to a community, to a region, to people… Language is culture,” the Court noted.
• The message conveyed is that all languages, including Urdu, should be celebrated as unifying elements that foster connections among diverse ideas, cultures, and communities.

Important Sentences:

• “The prejudice against Urdu stems from the misconception that Urdu is alien to India.”
• “Language is not religion. Language does not even represent religion. Language belongs to a community, to a region, to people… Language is culture.”
• Urdu, along with Marathi and Hindi, is acknowledged as an Indo-Aryan language born in India.
• Urdu's integral role in India's syncretic cultural heritage was emphasized through its historical richness and community roots.
• The Supreme Court's ruling underscores the need to appreciate linguistic diversity rather than viewing language as a dividing factor.

This ruling is a reaffirmation of India’s pluralistic identity, encouraging a collective appreciation of languages as an essential part of its cultural landscape.

The Supreme Court of India upheld the use of Urdu on the signboard of a municipal council building in Maharashtra, emphasizing the cultural significance of language and the need for inclusivity. The court rejected a petition from a former councillor who challenged the legality of the Urdu signage, affirming that the use of Urdu is not barred under the Maharashtra Local Authorities (Official Languages) Act, 2022.

Key Points

• The Supreme Court asserted that "language is culture" and should not be a divisive factor, promoting Urdu as a representation of “Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb” or Hindustani culture.
• Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran reiterated that misconceptions about Urdu being an alien language must be challenged, recognizing it as an integral part of Indian heritage.
• The judgment emphasized that languages belong to communities and regions, rather than religions, highlighting that Urdu, like Hindi and Marathi, is an Indo-Aryan language developed in India.
• Urdu serves as a primary medium of communication, essential for effective interaction within communities, as the court noted.
• India boasts immense linguistic diversity, with more than 122 major languages, including 34 specified in the Census, wherein Urdu ranks as the sixth most spoken scheduled language.
• The court noted that the prejudice against Urdu might stem from the misconception that it is foreign to India, urging people to embrace the rich tapestry of Indian languages.
• Historical context demonstrates that discussions about language in India date back to before Independence, with ‘Hindustani’ being considered a potential national language uniting various regional tongues.
• The language divide, particularly between Hindi and Urdu, was exacerbated by colonial rule, leading to misunderstandings that falsely associate Urdu with Islam and Hindi with Hinduism.
• The court reiterated that the municipal council's use of Urdu does not contravene any law, as providing services in a language the local population understands serves the community’s best interests.
• It was highlighted that Urdu continues to influence court parlance, showcasing its relevance in legal contexts and everyday conversations in India.

Overall, the Supreme Court's ruling reinforces the notion that promoting Urdu and recognizing its value can unite rather than divide communities, fostering a dialogue of inclusivity in India's pluralistic society.