Waqf Board vacancies: Kerala High Court sets six-week deadline for State's compliance report

The Kerala High Court has directed the State government to file a report within six weeks detailing the steps taken to fill vacancies in the Kerala State Waqf Board. The order came during the hearing of a batch of public interest litigations (PILs) alleging that the Board had been functioning without the mandated representation of non-Muslim members under the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development (UMEED) Act, 2025.

The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice V.M. Syam Kumar, was informed by the State that the process to reconstitute the Board had already begun. According to the government's submission, the Chief Executive Officer of the Kerala State Waqf Board has been directed to conduct a detailed assessment to determine the exact number of representatives required from various Muslim communities, including Shia, Sunni, Bohra, Aghakhani, and other backward classes. The State stated that it is prepared to reconstitute the Board once this determination is complete.

Earlier, the court had observed that the reconstitution of the Waqf Board falls entirely within the executive powers of the State government, and that the judiciary would not interfere in the matter. The Bench had also orally suggested that the State could nominate two non-Muslim members to comply with the statutory requirements under the UMEED Act.

The PILs were filed by BJP leader Shone George, the Assembly of Christian Trust Services (ACTS), Aal-E-Rasool Foundation president Sajid Hussain Khatai, and Indian Air Force Junior Warrant Officer V.M. Stalin. The petitioners have argued that the failure to include non-Muslim members violates the provisions of the UMEED Act, which mandates such representation to ensure broad-based governance of the Waqf Board.

The UMEED Act, which came into effect in 2025, replaced the earlier Waqf Act and introduced significant changes to the composition and functioning of Waqf Boards across the country. Under the new law, the Board is required to include members from different religious and community backgrounds, reflecting the diverse population that interacts with Waqf properties and institutions.

In Kerala, the Waqf Board manages thousands of properties and charitable institutions. The absence of a fully constituted Board has raised concerns about administrative delays and governance gaps, particularly in the management of Waqf assets and the resolution of disputes. The petitioners have sought the court's intervention to ensure that the Board is reconstituted without further delay and in strict compliance with the law.

The court, while granting the State six weeks to submit its report, has not issued any interim orders on the composition of the Board. The matter is scheduled for further hearing after the submission of the compliance report. The court's decision to allow the State administrative process to proceed reflects a constitutional balance between judicial oversight and executive authority.

The case highlights the broader debate over the governance of religious endowments and the role of statutory bodies in ensuring equitable representation. While the UMEED Act seeks to modernise Waqf administration, its implementation has faced legal and procedural challenges in several states. The Kerala High Court's directive is expected to set a precedent for how such vacancies are addressed in a timely and lawful manner.

The State government has not yet commented on the court's order. However, its earlier assurances to the court suggest that it views the reconstitution process as a priority. The next hearing will determine whether the government has made sufficient progress in filling the vacancies and whether the new Board will reflect the diverse composition required by law.

For now, the six-week deadline provides a clear timeline for action. It also underscores the judiciary's role in holding the executive accountable to statutory mandates, while respecting the latter's constitutional discretion in administrative matters.