The Delhi High Court on Monday issued notices to the Central government, the Central Waqf Council, the Delhi government and the Delhi Waqf Board on a batch of petitions challenging several provisions of the new law that govern landlord–tenant relationships in waqf properties [Satya Bhushan and Ors v. Union of India & Ors].
A Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia directed the government bodies to file their replies in six weeks.
The Court noted that the provisions of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 2025 (UMEED Act) have been challenged before the Supreme Court and that it would await the outcome of those proceedings before deciding the case.
The Bench passed the order on a batch of petitions filed by tenants of waqf properties challenging Sections 3 (ee), 32, 54, 56, 83, 85, and 88 of the UMEED Act 2025 and Rules 4, 5, 6, 7, 18, and 19 of the Waqf Properties Lease Rules, 2014.
Notably, the petitioner had approached the High Court earlier as well, challenging similar provisions in the old waqf law. However, the Court disposed of the plea when the new Act came into force.
It is the petitioners’ case that provisions of the UMEED Act violate Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
The petition states that the new Act has expanded the definition of “encroacher” to include tenants whose tenancy has expired or has been terminated despite protection granted under the Delhi Rent Control Act.
It contends that under the new law, tenants can be dispossessed after termination of lease and the Waqf Tribunal will decide questions related to eviction of tenant or determination of rights and obligation of the lessor and lessee of waqf property, despite the protection granted under the Slum Area (Improvement and Clearance) Act 1956 and the Delhi Rent Control Act.
The Waqf Properties Lease Rules, 2014 under challenge regulate relations of landlord and tenant, including those related to tenure, increase in rent etc.
In the plea, it is stated that the Rules provide for inviting bidding based on circle rates of properties in violation of the provisions of the Delhi Rent Control Act, which provides exclusive jurisdiction to the Rent Controller on such aspects.
The petitions have been filed by Advocate Anubhav Sharma.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma appeared for the Union of India.
Delhi Waqf Board was represented through Senior Advocate Sanjoy Ghose.