One and a half thousand years ago, long before the birth of the doctrine of uses and trusts in English Law, Islamic Law recognized and developed a legal expedient under the name of wakf, which permitted an owner to settle his property for the use of beneficiaries in perpetuity.
The subject of "Wakf" is relative to Entry No. 10 "Trust and trustees" and No. 28 "Charities and charitable institutions, charitable and religious endowments and religious institutions" in the concurrent list attached to the 7th Schedule to the Constitution of India. Supervision over the administration of wakfs is, therefore, the responsibility of both the Central and State Governments.
Article 26 of the Constitution gives freedom to every religious denomination to establish and maintain its religious and charitable institutions subject to public order, morality and health. They are also allowed the right to administer the properties of these institutions in accordance with the law. In other words, the right of administration is left to the institutions themselves. Subject of course, to such regulations as the law might choose to impose. But a law which takes the whole right of administration is null and void. The regulatory laws assume their importance out of the fact that in case of public trusts and endowments, some amount of control or supervision over their administration is necessary in the interest of the public as a whole. Such laws are valid insofar as they do not interfere with the internal matters of the institutions. The State cannot, however, interfere in the establishment or maintenance of religious and charitable institutions" or in the management of religious affairs. The various religious denominations or sects are allowed to manage them in accordance with the tenets of their religions. The only interference possible is on grounds of public order, health and morality.
The doctrine of Wakf which is interwoven with the entire religious life and social economy of Muslims has laid down the foundations of one of the most important institutions of the community. In India alone there are more than a lakh wakfs valued at more than a hundred crore of rupees. An extensive survey of wakf properties throughout the country is nearing completion.
Origin History and Development
The institution of Wakf or the provision of dedication of property, movable or immovable, for religious purposes and for waqf the uplift of the poorer sections of the society have been a distinguishing feature of the socio-economic structure of Islam. Devotion to the way of God or the way of goodness or piety and a strong desire to win Divine approbation have been the root cause of the origin and development of the institution.
The Quran contains no reference to wakf but it abounds in injunctions in the matter of charity,
"And in their wealth the beggar and the outcaste had due share." (Surah 51, Ver. 19)
"They ask thee (O Muhammad) what they shall spend, say; that which ye spend for good (must go) to parents and near kindred and orphans and the needy and wayfarer. And whatever good ye do, to I Allah is Aware of it." (Surah 2, Ver. 215)
Historically, the origin of wakf is traced to the prescriptions of the Prophet. Omar had acquired a piece of land in the canton of Khaibar and proceeded to the Prophet and sought his counsel to make the most pious use of it, whereupon the Prophet declared, "Tie up the property (asl-corpus) and devote the usufruct to human beings that it is not to be sold or made the subject of gift or inheritance; devote its produce to your children, your kindred and the poor in the way of God." In accordance with this rule Omar dedicated the property in question as wakf which continued in existence for several centuries until the land became waste.
The term wakf as defined in clause (1) of Section 3 of the Wakf Act, 1954, means a permanent dedication made by a person professing Islam of any movable or immovable property for any purpose recognised by the Muslim Law as pious, religious or charitable and includes a wakf by the user, mashru-ulkhidmat and wakf-alal-aulad to the extent the property is dedicated for any of the purposes mentioned above.
For creation of wakf it is not necessary that the settler should be a Muslim. Any non-Muslim can also create under the Muslim law a wakf provided the object of the wakf is one which is recognised by Muslim Law as pious, religious or charitable and his own religion treats the object in the same manner. The words 'professing Islam' in clause (1) of Section 3 have been purposely retained for otherwise all charitable and many pious endowments of other communities would have come within the purview of the Act because the purposes for which they stand are also regarded as charitable or pious under the Muslim Law.
The Wakf (Amendment) Act, 1964, has amplified this definition by treating all grants made for religious, pious and charitable purposes including mashru-ul-khidmat as wakf and also as permanent dedications made for mosques, dargahs, imambaras, takias, musafirkhanas, etc., by non-Muslims. Under the Muslim Law, these dedications were always wakf but the definition contained in clause (1) Section 3 had excluded them from the purview of the Act. In Kanti v. Mirza Hossani , it has been held that land used for Masjids and for the Muharram festival from time immemorial is wakf and evidence of express dedication is not necessary. When a long period has elapsed since the origin of the alleged wakf, the user can be the only available evidence to show if the property is wakf or not. When there is no evidence to show how and when the alleged wakf was created, the wakf may be established by the evidence of a user.
Moreover, according to the Wakf Act, ‘Wakf’ means the permanent dedication by a person professing Islam". The words “professing Islam" are purposely kept here to exclude charitable and pious endowments of other communities from the purview of the Act. However, Section 60-C of the Act makes a special provision for the creation of Wakf by non-Muslims, provided the object of the wakf does not carry the words of a person professing Islam.
The definition of a beneficiary as given in clause (a) of Section 3 of the Wakf Act, 1954, had unnecessarily restricted its scope. The beneficiary was defined as a person or object for whose benefit a wakf is created and includes religious, pious and charitable objects and any other objects of public utility established for the benefit of the Muslim community. The use of the words “objects of public utility” established for the benefit of the Muslim community' was wholly unnecessary for they are covered by the preceding clause and include religious, pious or charitable objects. The addition of these words had made the definition of ‘beneficiary’ inconsistent with the definition of wakf in clause (1) which incorporated no such restrictions.
In Zain Yar Jung v. Director of Endowments , the Supreme Court held that the objects of public utility which may constitute beneficiaries under the wakf must be objects for the benefit of the Muslim community. There can be no doubt that the wakfs with which the Act deals are trusts which are treated as wakfs under the definition of Section 3 (1) and as such, a trust which does not satisfy the tests prescribed by the said definition would be outside the Act.
The same view was held by Madras High Court when it stated that a ‘wakf,’ created as an object of public utility is excluded from the operation of the Act if it does not benefit the Muslim community exclusively! Though the word ‘exclusively' has not been used in the definition in clause (a) of Section 3 and though this ruling tended to ignore the main clause in the definition and include ‘religious, pious and charitable objects,' there is no doubt that the words 'objects of public utility established for the benefit of Muslim community' were creating difficulty. They blurred the real concept of charity in Islam which makes no distinction between Muslim and non-Muslim among the recipients of charity. Wherever there is an injunction or inducement in the Quran or Hadith on charity, the recipients are stated as the poor, indigent, orphans, travellers, the down-trodden and poor neighbour without making any distinction on the basis of religion, caste or creed. For all these reasons, the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 1964 substituted the words “objects of public utility established for the benefit of Muslim community” with the words “objects of public utility sanctioned by Muslim Law."
Essential Requisites of a Wakf
Under the Muslim law a wakf means dedication by a person embracing the Muslim faith of any property for any purpose recognized by the Muslim law as religious, pious or charitable. The dedication must be permanent and by the owner of the property who by reason of such dedication of the property should divest himself of such property and hand over the possession thereof to the mutawalli.
There is nothing in the Mohammedan law to invalidate a wakf, where the objects of the endowment are clear and certain, simply for the reason that no certain portion of the property or specified amounts of the usufruct have been dedicated to charity or other religious, pious or charitable pur¬pose of a permanent character recognized by the Mohammedan law.
It will appear from the definitions given above that a wakf should possess the following features :
(1) There should be dedication in perpetuity.—Perpetuity is a necessary condition for the validity of a wakf according to all opinions. A wakf is not governed by rules against perpetuity . If a wakf is made and is silent as to whether it is to be in perpetuity a difference of opinions exists as to its validity. According to Abu Hanifa and Muhammad, a wakf is not com¬plete unless the wakif destines the ultimate dedication to objects which are not liable to become extinct. Abu Yusuf maintains that an express mention is not necessary. Thus, if the wakif makes a wakf to Zaid, the wakf is valid, and the property passes to the poor on the death of Zaid. So also, according to him, if a wakf is made for a month or any specified time without further addition, the wakf would be valid and perpetual. But if it is further provided that the wakf would be void after the expiry of the specified time, the wakf would be void according to all. The view of Abu Yusuf seems to have been approved.
The view of Abu Yusuf had not been followed.
(2) The wakf should be immediate.—Except in the case of testamentary wakfs the law insists on a immediate transfer of property and a wakf postponing the coming into effect of the wakf would be void. The wakf must be made to take immediate effect absolutely for ever. A wakf must not toe deferred to any future date.
. (3) It should not be contingent.—A wakf is invalid if it is made contingent on the happening of an event. Thus, if the wakf is made contingent on the death of a person without leaving children it will be void.9 But a direction that the wakf will not come into effect till certain debts of the wakif are paid off or that it was necessary to ascertain the residue whichwas dedicated. or that all the heirs decided to partition the property among themselves, the equivalent in cash of one-third of his property should be reserved for reigious purposes or expended on works acceptable to God will not make the wakf contingent.
Shia law.—Contingent wakfs are invalid under the Shia law also.
(4) It should not be conditional —The appropriation must not be suspended on anything and its real test is to see whether the dedication was complete at once at the time. Thus, if a condition is imposed that if the property is mismanaged, it should be divided among the heirs of the wakif or that the property would be sold for wakifs necessities, the wakf would be invalid. If a right to assume possession and divide the property according to ancestral shares is reserved in a family agreement even though some provisions are made for meeting the expense of a dargah, the wakf would be invalid .
The wakif has got the power to make the reservation of some rights and benefit for himself. If a right is reserved otherwise than as permitted under that section the wakf would be invalid. But where some rights which cannot be reserved are reserved in respect of a part of the dedicated property which is distinct and separable, the wakf as to the rest of the property would be valid.
(5) The wakif should completely divest himself of ownership of the property—There is a difference of opinion between Abu Yusuf and the disciples. According to Abu Hanifa the ownership of the property even after the dedication continues to be with the wakif while according to the disciples the wakif ceases to be an owner. The view of Abu Hanifa has not been accepted. From the time of the dedication, the property ceases to be that of the wakif. He should sever all connection with the property as an owner. It the wakif retains any control or dominion over the property as such the wakf becomes invalid.
It is a question of construction of the deed whether the wakif has wholly divested himself of all property. The fundamental idea is that the ownership of the property vests in God. and is placed in his implied ownership as a juristic person. If the legal and beneficial interest is reserved during the lifetime of the person making the wakf it is invalid.
Shia law.—The wakif must be entirely divested of the property.5
(6) It must be made for objects mentioned in the Act.
(7) There must be a proper subject of wakf.
In the case of wakf made by a Shia Muslim delivery of possession is necessary as laid down in Sec. 186 of the Mulla's Mohammedan Law. 16th Ed. at p. 180. The Privy Council also held in Ali Zamin v. Akbar Ali Khar that under Shia law actual delivery of possession by or by direction of the wakif is a condition precedent to the wakf having validity and effect.
Kinds of Wakf
Broadly speaking wakfs can be of two kinds: Public and private. But the most accepted is its three-fold classification -- public, quasi-public and private.
Public trusts are those which are dedicated to the public at large having no restriction of any kind regarding its use, e. g., bridge, well, road, etc.
Quasi-public wakfs are those, the primary object of which is partly to provide for the benefit of particular individuals or class of individuals which may be the settler's family, and partly to public, so they are partly public and partly private.
Private wakfs are those which provide benefit to private individuals, including the settler's family or relations. Such a wakf is termed as wakf-alal-aulad. The Mutawalli manages the wakf but he cannot alienate the property. He is, however, more than a manager or superintendent, as he does not hang on the pleasure of anybody else or to anybody. Under Muslim Law a private wakf is subject to the same restrictions as any public wakf as the Law makes no distinction between public and private wakfs. Both are subject to the rules of divine property where the rights of the wakf are extinguished and it becomes the property of God. Both the wakfs are created in perpetuity and the properly becomes inalienable. Like public wakfs, a private wakf can under no circumstances fail and when the line of descent becomes extinct, the entire corpus goes to charity.
It may be clarified here that the term ‘private’ is used to connote wakfs for private individuals. It does not include wakfs which are of public nature, such as, a mosque. According to Muslim Law, there is nothing like a "Private Mosque". A person can set apart an apartment for his own prayers, but if he allows others to say their prayers in it, it assumes & public character. The test whether a building is a mosque, it is enough to make it "wakf" provided that public prayers are even once said with the permission of the settler.
According to Abu Yusuf, wakf is the detention of a thing in the implied ownership of Almighty God in such a way that its profits may be applied for the benefit of human beings, and the dedication when once made, is absolute, so that the thing dedicated can neither be sold, nor given or inherited. In India the view of Kazi Abu Yusuf is adopted. In Jewun Dass v. Shah Kubeer-Ooddin, the Privy Council held that after the creation of wakf, the right of the wakif is extinguished and the ownership is transferred to the Almighty. Fatawa-i-Alamgiri declares that “decrees in this country are given according to Abu Yusuf."
In a recent case, Kassimiah Charities v. Secy. Madras State Wakf Board , the meaning of wakf was taken as the detention of the corpus in the ownership of God in such a manner that its profits may be applied for the benefits of His servants. The objects of dedication must be pious or charitable. Hence, the three dominant characteristics of ‘wakf' can be summarized as under:
1. In the first instance, the motive must be religious; a merely secular motive would render the dedication a gift or a trust, but not a wakf.
2. Secondly, it must be of a permanent nature. A pious gift which is not a permanent foundation may be a Sadaqa but cannot, in law, be termed as a wakf.
3. And lastly, the usufruct is to be utilized for the good of mankind.
Creation of Wakf
There is no essential formality or the use of any express phrase or term requisite for the constitution of wakf. The law looks to the intention of the donor alone. Where a dedication is intended, the law will give effect to it in whatever language it may be expressed or in whatever terms the wish may be formulated.
It is not necessary that a wakf should be made in writing. All that is necessary in constituting a wakf is that some sort of declaration, either oral or in writing must be made. Though oral wakf is permitted yet when the terms of a wakf are reduced into writing, no evidence can be given to prove the terms except the document itself or secondary evidence of its contents, when it is admissible.
Where a wakf deed is executed, it must comply with the provisions of the Registration Act. Thus, a wakf deed of immovable property of Rs. 100 or upwards would require registration.
Sometimes, circumstances are also to be considered to ascertain a wakf: the statement and conduct of the wakif and his successors and the method in which the property has been treated are circumstances which though not conclusive are relevant . It was repeatedly held by the Privy Council and the different High Courts of India that for creating a valid wakf, it is not essential to use the word °•wakf'." Neither the use of the word wakf nor express dedication of the property to the ownership of God is essential for the creation of a wakf where the tenor of the document may show that a wakf was intended. Any implied expression is enough for the purpose.
Fatawa Kazi Khan says, “If a man says, this land is mauqoofa' for God in perpetuity', it will create a valid wakf.” And even if there is no mention of ‘perpetuity', it will create a valid wakf, and perpetuity will be presumed.
“And if a man were to say, that this land is dedicated, consecrated, not to be sold, inherited or given by a gift, all these words would create a wakf according to Abu Yusuf," says Radd-ul-Mukhtar. Similar are the observations of Wajiz-ulMuhit.
A wakf can also be created by long user. In a case where there is no evidence to show how and when the alleged wakf was created, the wakf may be established by evidence of the user. Where land had been used from time immemorial for religious purposes, say a mosque, the land becomes wakf, even though there is no evidence of express dedication.
In the case of Imambara it was held by the Oudh High Court that if 'majalises' were celebrated and "Quran Khani' was done and the building had never been used as a residential house, the presumption of dedication will be made. But it would be erroneous to think that the burial of a saint on a particular spot would make it wakf, in spite of the fact that 'Urs' was held there without the proprietor's objections
As far as the courts in India are concerned, a declaration of endowment and delivery of possession to the Mutawalli are essentials of a wakf. When the first Mutawalli happens to be wakif himself, a mere declaration is sufficient to constitute a wakf. Where the wakif after creating a bonafide wakf treats the wakf property as his own and commits certain wrongful acts in pursuance of this notion, these acts will only amount to a breach of trust and would not in any way affect the validity of the wakf.
(b) Delivery of possession
According to Abu Yusuf a dedication of wakf is complete by a mere declaration. Neither delivery of possession nor appointment of Mutawalli is essential. The view has been adopted by most of the High Courts in India. Dedication by way of a wakf is completed when the wakif makes a dedication in good faith with a real intention of divesting himself of the ownership of the property which he intends to dedicate:
(1) If he nominates another person as Mutawalli such an intention is ordinarily evidenced by delivery of the wakf property to himself or Mutawalli; the failure to deliver needs at least some explanation : want of such an intention may be inferred if there is no explanation.
(2) The fact that no person is nominated as Mutawalli does not necessarily show a want of such an intention; it may be presumed in proper cases that the wakif himself intended to act as a Mutawalli; but this last presumption may be rebutted by evidence that the wakif did not act as such, and neither himself gave nor requested another to give any effect to his declaration.
(c) Appointment of Mutawalli
In its earlier decision, the Allahabad High Court followed the view of Imam Muhammad: that a wakf is not complete unless:
(1) there is a declaration, coupled with
(2) appointment of Mutawalli ; and
(3) delivery of possession,
Even according to the previous view of the Allahabad High Court, a mere declaration was sufficient where the wakif himself was the Mutawalli. It was not necessary to transfer the property from his name as owner into his name as Mutawalli. The mere delay in transferring possession or getting the name mutated could not have invalidated the wakf.
Under Shia law the possession has to be delivered to the first person in whose favour the wakf has been made. In the case of a public wakf, a Mutawalli must be appainted to the possession.
Garib Das and Ors. v. Munshi Abdul Hamid and Ors.
One Tassaduk Hussain was the owner of the disputed house had admittedly executed a deed of wakf on June 21, 1914 in respect of the same for the benefit of a mosque and Madrasa at Nathnagar and had the same registered. In terms of the deed the donor was to remain in possession of the house as Mutawalli and his wife was to be the Mutawalli after his death. The document provided that after the death of both the husband and wife the Mutawalli would be elected by the panchas of the muslim community of Nathnagar and so long as the donor and his wife were living they would maintain themselves from the income of the property and spend the balance left for the mosque and the Madrasa. Tassaduk Hussain executed and registered three deeds on 10th December, 1949 by one of which he purported to cancel a gift deed dated November 4, 1939 executed in favour of some of his relations in respect of the disputed house. By the second document he cancelled another registered deed of gift dated August 2, 1948 executed in favour of another relation of his in respect of the identical property. And by the third document he purported to cancel the deed of wakf of 1914. Thereafter he executed and registered three separate sale deeds on March 27, 1949 one in favour of the appellant Garib Das, a second in favour of Shamlal and a third in favour of Gobind Lal. All these three deeds were in respect of portions of the disputed property. Tassaduk Hussain died in July, 1950.
The suit was filed by the first plaintiff as the elected Mutawalli of the wakf created by Tasaduk Hussain joining with him plaintiffs 2 and 3 as members of the Sadar Nathnagar Masjid Committee. Garib Das, Shyam Lal and Gobind Lal, the alienees from Tasaduk Hussain were impleaded as defendants first party.. The first three defendants were described as tenants in the suit properties. The plaintiffs claimed to set aside the deeds in favour of the said persons on the ground that as a valid wakf had already been created in favour of the mosque and Madrasa and had been acted upon, the deed of cancellation of December 10, 1949 and the sale deeds in favour of the first three defendants could not affect the wakf. A prayer was also made that as the said three defendants who were tenants had repudiated their tenancy they had forfeited the same and they had become trespassers and were liable to eviction as such.
Lower Court Proceedings
The Subordinate Judge who tried the suit found the deed or wakf to be invalid holding, inter alia, that there could be no reservation for the benefit of the donor in the case of an endowment purportedly in favour of a mosque. He also held that the endowment was bad for uncertainty on the ground that the mosque and the Madrasa mentioned in the wakf could not be identified and that Tasaduk Hussain never had any intention to create a wakf.
The High Court's conclusions were: (1) that Tasaduk Hussain had created the wakf in question in 1914 and he continued to be the mutawalli of the same until his death. (2) the wakf was not a sham or illusory transaction. (3) It was not bad for uncertainty or vagueness. (4) It was not bad or void on account of reservation of some benefit in favour of himself and his wife.
Ratio- The founder of a wakf may constitute himself the first mutawalli and when the founder and the mutawalli are the same person, no transfer of physical possession is necessary. Nor is it necessary that the property should be transferred from the name of the donor as owner into his name as mutawalli. An apparent transaction must be presumed to be real and the onus of proving the contrary is on the person alleging that the wakf was not intended to be acted upon.
Punjab Wakf Board v. Shakur Masih
The admitted facts are that Najaf Khan was the owner of the properties, namely, houses and shops situated in Jutog. He had executed a will on August 29, 1949 bequeathing all his properties to his son's mother-in-law, namely, Smt. Musamat Kariman. He added a note to the Will on dated 29-9-1949 stating thus:
"After the death of Masomat Kariman, my entire property would become wakf and the income from that would be spent for the maintenance of the Mosque at Jatog. Nobody shall have the right either to mortgage or sell these properties."
The appellant filed the suit for declaration that it is a wakf properly and the respondent has no manner of right whatsoever. All the Courts below have concurrently held that the wakf has not been created by Najaf Khan and, therefore, the will is void and the wakf thereby has not been created. The question is; whether the view taken by the Courts below including the High Court is correct in law?
The hon’ble court relied on Chapter XII of the principles of Mohomedan Law, Nineteenth Edition edited by M. Hidayatullah, former Chief Justice of this Court, it is slated that a wakf means permanent dedication by a person professing the Mussalman faith of any property for any purpose recognized by the Mussalman law as religious, pious or charitable. Under Section 174, the dedication must be permanent. Under Section 176, the subject to wakf must belong to the wakif, namely, the property dedicated by way of wakf must belong to the wakif (dedicator) at the time of dedication. Under Section 191, contingent wakf is not valid. It is essential to the validity of a wakf that the appropriation should not be made to depend on a contingency.
Ratio- that bequest creating a wakf contingent upon the life time of a lady is invalid and therefore the contingent wakf is not valid as per Section 191 of the principles of Muslim Law
Other Judicial Precedents
Ahmed Ariff v. CWT
Wakf means "the tying up of property in the ownership of God, the Almighty
and the devotion of the profits for the benefit of human beings".
Bibi Siddique Fatima v. Saiyed Mohammad Mahmood Hasan
The ownership of the wakf property has no jural conception with any exactitude and the corpus is tied down and is made non-alienable. Only the usufruct and the income from the corpus of the wakf property is available for carrying out the objects of the wakf.
Mohammad Sabir Ali v. Tahir Ali
No formal dedication or use of the word "wakf or an express transfer of the corpus of the properties to God is necessary for constituting a wakf, the dedication of properties to purposes recognised by Mohammedan law as religious or charitable may be inferred and that in itself will give rise
to a wakf.
Syed Mohd. Salie Labbai v. Mohd. Hanifa
Following are the essential conditions for creation of a valid wakf dedication for a mosque of public nature.
(i) The founder must declare his intention to dedicate a property for the purpose of a mosque,
(ii) The founder must divest himself completely from the ownership of the property.
(iii) The founder must make some sort of a separate entrance to the mosque which
may be used by the public to enter the mosque.
Allaha Rakhi v. Shah Md. Abdul Rahim
Creation of a valid wakf leads to simultaneously passing of all rights of property out of the wakf and its vesting in God Almighty. The person in the administration of the wakf, whether mutawalli, Sajjadanashin, or mujawar, or known by any other name, is merely a manager of the wakf. He is not a 'trustee' in the technical sense of the term as understood nor is any property belonging to the wakf 'vested' in him.
M. A. Namazie Endowment v. CIT
Where reading the relevant clauses of a deed of wakf, it is held that the wakf was created for the benefit of the wakif s poor relations and, therefore, it is not a wakf created for charitable or reli¬gious purposes eligible for exemption, the enactment of the Wakfs Act, 1954 (29 of 1954) can have no impact on the character of such wakf for the purposes of the Income Tax Act. Even the fact of inclusion of such wakf in the list of wakfs published in the Gazette as per the provisions of that Act would not change the character of such wakf.
Critically examining of this project will clearly highlight certain aspects about the institution of wakf, in the present times. The foremost of these aspects is that wakf is only for religious purpose and is permanent in nature, it cannot be a temporary institute. Also any gain derived out of a wakf has to be use for the benefit of the mankind. Though their hasn’t been a great deal of judicial scrutiny on this topic in the recent times but even in the few cases that have come up the Courts of the country have passed their decisions keeping these aspects in mind.
It can be unhesitatingly said that the enactment of the Wakf Act. 1954, made a landmark in the history of wakf administration in India. By constituting unofficial Boards vested with considerable authority and powers, by imposing a precise obligation upon mutawallis and making their violation a penal offence, by associating the State Governments in the supervisory responsibility and by conferring authority on the Central Government to lay down the policies to be adopted by the Boards, the Act has laid down a sound administrative structure to ensure proper administration of wakfs in the country. Whatever lacunae or weaknesses existed in the Act have been removed by the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 1964 and the Act as amended is a very sound piece of legislation.
Considering their number and resources, wakf can become a strong instrument not only for the preservation of religious and charitable institutions, but also for the educational and economic development of the community. Wakfs constitute a national asset for a very large number of these support schools, colleges, technical institute, libraries, reading-rooms, charitable dispensaries and Musafirkhanas, etc., which benefit the public irrespective of their religion or creed. It is of utmost importance, therefore, that wakfs should be maintained properly and their resources should be utilised for the objects and the purposes of dedications. But unfortunately, many of the existing wakfs have not escaped the process of decadence brought in by the twin impact of neglect and misuse.
On a detail study of the topic the writer of the project would like to highlight the problems faced by the wakf boars which need to be redressed soon. Some of them are-
• Grabbing of wakf properties.
• Matters regarding wakf properties pending in courts for several years.
• Lack of proper supervision of wakf land and properties.
• Need to ensure proper possession of wakf properties.
• Further amendment in wakf Act and legal protection.
• Wakf properties be brought out of the purview of the Rent Control Acts.
• All wakf properties must have boundaries.
• Wakf land be used for the welfare of the people.
• Welfare/Social Welfare and Development institutions or organisations be set up on wakf land.
• Performance of the wakf board be watched constantly