The Supreme Court on Thursday (December 12) put on hold the Kerala High Court’s conclusion that the Munambam property is not Waqf land, ordering that the present condition of the land be maintained until January 27.

A bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan clarified, however, that it has not stayed the High Court’s observations upholding the State Government’s authority to appoint a single-member Commission of Inquiry to examine the nature and extent of the 404.76-acre parcel in Munambam.

The interim protection was issued while the Court heard a Special Leave Petition filed by the Kerala Waqf Samrakshana Vedi challenging the High Court’s judgment.

At the start of the hearing, Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, assisted by AoR Abdulla Naseeh, argued that the High Court had unnecessarily ventured into the validity of the Waqf deed even though the writ petition only questioned the State’s decision to constitute a Commission. Determining the genuineness of the Waqf deed and the character of the land, he said, fell squarely within the Waqf Tribunal’s exclusive authority. He also pointed out that a challenge to the 2019 Waqf notification is already pending before the Tribunal.

Ahmadi submitted, “My writ was limited to challenging the inquiry by the Commission. Under Sections 85 and 83 read with Section 7 of the Waqf Act, only the Tribunal can decide these questions. But the division bench went ahead and declared my deed a gift deed, not a Waqf.”

Opposing the petitioner, Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, for the State, argued that the petitioner-organisation was a third party with no direct stake. He emphasised that the muttawalli had not challenged the Commission and was not aggrieved. Gupta noted that the original writ was in the nature of a PIL.

He said, “This is a PIL. The muttawalli hasn’t come forward claiming it is Waqf property. The petitioner asserts grievance without locus.”

Gupta also informed the Court that the Commission has already submitted its findings. Ahmadi, however, maintained that the petitioner had a representative interest in safeguarding Waqf properties, especially since the muttawalli had aligned with the opposing side.

Senior Advocate V Chitambaresh, appearing for current land residents, argued that the petition had become infructuous because the State had already received the Commission’s report. He stressed that the residents—mainly poor fishing families—were never heard before their long-occupied lands were abruptly notified as Waqf property in 2019. Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, representing another group of residents, highlighted an existing civil court decree declaring the land non-Waqf.

The bench questioned whether the High Court was the appropriate forum to decide the land’s character when the Tribunal is already adjudicating the issue. Justice Misra remarked, “You are in a worse position now than before filing the writ. If the writ was not maintainable, the High Court could have stopped there. Instead, it exceeded its jurisdiction.”

Justice Bhuyan echoed this, asking whether the writ court could examine such factual disputes. “He could have set aside the single judge’s order without entering into these issues. None of this was requested. The State should have appealed if it disagreed. This renders your plea almost meaningless,” he said.

The bench’s order reads:

“The matter requires consideration. Issue notice returnable in week commencing 27 January. In the meantime, the declaration in the impugned judgment that the property in question is not subject matter of waqf shall remain stayed and the status quo as regards the same shall be maintained.”

Advocate Subhash Chandran K accepted notice for the Kerala State Waqf Board, and Advocate CK Sasi, standing counsel, represented the State.

Background

The Munambam dispute involves 404.76 acres in Ernakulam district originally transferred to the Farook College Managing Committee by Mohammed Sidhique Sait through a 1950 deed. Over time, the College sold parts of this land to several individuals, many of whom built homes and other structures. In 2019, the Kerala Waqf Board declared the land a Waqf, treating the original deed as a Waqf deed rather than a gift. This sparked intense resistance from local families claiming lawful ownership.

The controversy drew statewide and national attention, especially amid wider discussions around the Waqf Amendment Act 2025. The State Government subsequently appointed a judicial Commission headed by former judge Justice C.N. Ramachandran Nair to examine the dispute.

A single judge later set aside the Commission, holding that only the Waqf Tribunal had jurisdiction. On appeal, a division bench reinstated the Commission but also commented that the land was not Waqf property and that the Board’s registration was beyond its powers.

Petitioner’s Stand

The Waqf Samrakshana Vedhi argues that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by evaluating the 1950 deed and pronouncing upon its character when the only issue before the Court was the legality of setting up the Commission amid ongoing Tribunal proceedings. The petitioner asserts that determining the intention behind the original endowment, interpreting the deed, and deciding whether it constitutes a Waqf or a gift are matters requiring evidence and trial—squarely within the Tribunal’s domain.

The petition also highlights a prior judicial determination: in O.S. No. 53/1967, the Sub Court, Paravur held the deed to be a Waqf document, a finding upheld by the Kerala High Court in 1973 and never challenged. The petitioner argues that this conclusion binds all parties and cannot be revisited through an executive inquiry.

The petitioner further submits that allowing an inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, despite identical issues being sub-judice before the Tribunal, creates a parallel adjudicatory mechanism that the law does not permit.

The SLP has been filed through AoR Abdulla Naseeh.

Case Details

KERALA WAQF SAMRAKSHANA VEDHI (REGISTERED) vs. STATE OF KERALA
Diary No. 66064 / 2025