Whalesbook
A Kerala BJP leader has filed a petition in the High Court challenging the composition of the Kerala State Waqf Board. The plea alleges the board is not compliant with the Waqf Amendment Act 2025, which mandates the inclusion of non-Muslim members. This legal challenge raises questions about the validity of the board’s administrative decisions and ongoing property disputes, such as the Munambam land case, creating significant governance and legal uncertainty for stakeholders.
What Happened
The Kerala High Court is currently reviewing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Shone George, Vice President of the Kerala unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The petition challenges the legal validity of the current Kerala State Waqf Board, alleging that the state government has failed to follow the provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. This Act, which came into effect on April 8, 2025, requires State Waqf Boards to include at least two non-Muslim members to ensure diverse representation. The petition argues that the current board consists entirely of Muslim members, following a government order issued on February 4, 2026, which the petitioner claims violates the statutory mandate.
Governance and Legal Risk
The core of the dispute revolves around the validity of the board's actions. The petitioner contends that because the board was not constituted according to the law, its current functioning is legally questionable. In administrative and corporate law, a body that does not follow its founding rules faces the risk of its decisions being declared invalid from the start. This is a significant concern for stakeholders, as the Waqf Board holds substantial authority, including the power to manage properties, settle schemes, and appoint mutawallis (caretakers of waqf properties). If the court agrees that the board's constitution is defective, it could potentially undermine the legal standing of recent administrative decisions, creating uncertainty for those involved in ongoing property dealings or legal disputes handled by the board.
The Munambam Land Dispute Context
The legal challenge specifically highlights the Munambam waqf land dispute, a high-profile case affecting over 600 families. The petitioner argues that the board's continued involvement in this matter is problematic due to the alleged illegality of the board's composition. For affected families and other parties involved in Waqf-related property issues, this legal uncertainty adds a layer of complexity, as the legitimacy of the board's actions is now being tested in a higher court. The petition notes that while the state government has the authority to issue binding directions or supersede a non-compliant board under Sections 97 and 99 of the Waqf Act, it has not exercised these powers.
Court Status and Next Steps
A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, led by Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar VM, is handling the case. During the initial hearing, the court directed the government to provide its response regarding the composition of the board. The state authorities have been given a period of two weeks to file their submission. The petitioner is seeking a judicial declaration that the board's current functioning violates the amended Act and is requesting that the court direct the government to immediately appoint the mandatory non-Muslim members to restore the board's legal standing.
What Investors and Stakeholders Should Track
For those monitoring governance and regulatory environments in Kerala, the next important update will be the state government’s official response to the High Court. Stakeholders should watch for any court directives that might temporarily halt the board's decision-making process or require immediate changes to its structure. Additionally, the court’s interpretation of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, in this context will be critical. Any judicial observation regarding the validity of the board's past decisions could have broader implications for properties or management schemes currently under the board's purview. The final outcome of this PIL will determine whether the board must be restructured to align with the new statutory requirements.