DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Waqf committee adopts recommendations, revised Bill

Opposition MPs slam the exercise as ‘undemocratic’, to send dissent notes
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
Members of the Joint Parliamentary Committee share a light moment after a meeting on the Waqf Amendment Bill, in New Delhi, Wednesday, January 29, 2025. PTI
Advertisement

The Joint Parliamentary Committee on Waqf (Amendment) Bill adopted its draft report and the amended version of the proposed law with a majority vote on Wednesday, committee chairperson Jagdambika Pal said.

Advertisement

Pal stated that 16 members voted in favour, while 11 opposed it. Opposition members alleged that none of its amendments had been incorporated in the draft report. They are expected to submit their dissent notes in the final report later in the day.

Earlier, the Joint Parliamentary panel had circulated a 655-page report, inclusive of all the suggestions made by the members.

Advertisement

Amid fears that the existing Waqf properties would be subject to scrutiny after the amended law comes into force, the committee has recommended that no cases will be reopened against such properties retrospectively, provided the asset is not in dispute or belongs to the government.

The committee has accepted 14 amendments, which have been suggested by members of the BJP or its allies.

Advertisement

The Bill proposes numerous changes to the way Waqf boards are administered, including nominating non-Muslim and at least two women members.

The Bill also includes a provision stating that the central Waqf Council must include a Union minister and three MPs, two former judges, four people of 'national repute', and senior government officials, none of whom need be from the Islamic faith.

Furthermore, under the new rules, the Waqf Council cannot claim land.

Opposition leaders criticised the committee, alleging that a very short time had been allowed for studying the draft report.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Classifieds tlbr_img2 Videos tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 E-Paper tlbr_img5 Shorts