lok-sabha-extends-waqf-jpc-term-to-2025-budget-session

The Lok Sabha has approved a motion to extend the tenure of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill until the conclusion of the 2025 Budget Session.

 

This decision was taken in light of ongoing disputes between state governments and Waqf boards over the ownership of properties in several states, according to JPC chairman Jagdambika Pal.

 

During a recent meeting, Pal revealed that six states are at the center of these property disputes. The Waqf boards in these states have laid claim to certain properties, leading to delays in the submission of their responses to the committee's inquiries. In light of these complexities, the JPC requested an extension to thoroughly examine the issues and present its report by 2025.

 

Pal highlighted the historical context of the disputes, noting that some of the contested properties were acquired by the British in 1911 after compensation was paid. However, during the 1970s, Waqf boards began asserting ownership over 123 such properties.

 

Further complications arose during the tenure of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, which proposed transferring government-owned properties to Waqf boards at a nominal rate of Rs. 1 per acre per annum.

 

Although this decision was stayed by the courts, it raised concerns over the potential transfer of government properties worth approximately Rs. 1 lakh crore.

 

Pal emphasized the need for careful deliberation, stating that resolving such issues requires a detailed review of records and consultation with stakeholders. This, he said, justified the decision to seek an extension.

 

The JPC has held extensive meetings with Waqf boards, minority commissions, and government officials from states like Telangana, Odisha, Assam, Gujarat, and Tamil Nadu. Pal noted that over 125 hours of discussions have already been conducted, with meetings often spanning eight hours a day.

 

Despite this rigorous schedule, Pal criticized opposition members for their complaints about the workload, describing them as "needless." He expressed surprise that the opposition, which often criticized delays in committee work, was now objecting to the frequency and duration of meetings.