In New Delhi on Friday, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju told reporters that, for the next three months, the central government would not lay down fines or take any stringent measures against people who have not yet registered their Waqf properties on the UMEED portal. This comes despite the official deadline for registration expiring today, December 5.
The Minister added that a number of MPs and community leaders had asked for extra time, pointing out the difficulties faced by mutawallis—those who manage Waqf estates—in completing the paperwork. Rijiju noted that requests for an extended deadline had been sent to the Supreme Court, but the Court declined to widen the six‑month period that the law already entitles the government to.
He encouraged mutawallis still struggling within this grace period to file a request with the Waqf Tribunal. Under the Waqf (Amendment) Act, the Tribunal can grant an additional six months beyond the original window if needed.
“After the Waqf Law was changed, we launched the UMEED portal and gave a six‑month window for the registration of every Waqf property. Today is the last day of that window, yet hundreds of thousands of properties remain unregistered. Many MPs and community representatives have approached me to say they are finding it practically difficult to register almost nine lakh properties,” Rijiju explained.
He went on to say that progress has been made: “So far, over 1.5 lakh properties have been listed on the UMEED portal.” The Minister also pointed out how the pace varies by state. He praised Karnataka for its strong performance—about 50,000 properties registered so far—and mentioned that Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, and a handful of other states are also doing well. In contrast, several larger states are experiencing delays, often due to technical or administrative issues.
Rijiju assured stakeholders that the government would not impose penalties or initiate punitive action during the next three months. “I want to reassure all mutawallis that for the next three months, no penalty will be imposed and no strict action will be taken against those who complete their registration on the UMEED portal. If anyone still cannot register during this period, I strongly recommend they approach the Tribunal,” he said.
He repeated that the Supreme Court made it clear the government could not extend the deadline, but the Tribunal retains the discretion to grant additional time based on genuine circumstances. While expressing sympathy for those facing obstacles, Rijiju highlighted the legal limits the government must respect: “We always try to offer as much relief as possible, but some matters are governed strictly by law. Since Parliament passed the Waqf Amendment Act, the government cannot unilaterally change it.”
In cases involving incomplete documentation, disputes, or procedural complications, the Tribunal will decide the appropriate course of action. “If any Waqf property has documentation issues or lacks records for legitimate reasons, the Tribunal will review and decide. The government cannot intervene personally in such cases. However, if a property is legitimately Waqf-owned, proper records and validation will eventually be secured,” he clarified.
Rijiju underscored that the purpose of the registration requirement is to ensure transparency, accountability, and the protection of Waqf assets. “The aim of the new framework is to make sure Waqf properties are managed efficiently and not misused. These assets should be used for welfare activities in the name of Allah, especially benefiting economically weaker Muslims, including women, children, orphans, and marginalized communities,” he added.
Earlier, on December 1, the Supreme Court dismissed appeals seeking to extend the registration window. Justices Dipankar Datta and A.G. Masih noted that Section 3B of the amended Waqf Act already provides a legal pathway to seek extra time from the Tribunal, so the Court could not grant a blanket extension.
Representing the petitioners, senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, M.R. Shamshad, and Nizam Pasha argued that meeting the six‑month deadline was impractical because although the Amendment became effective on April 8, the portal went live only on June 6, and the relevant rules were formally notified on July 3. jk/rad
Stay informed on all the latest news, real-time breaking news updates, and follow all the important headlines in world News on Latest NewsX. Follow us on social media Facebook, Twitter(X), Gettr and subscribe our Youtube Channel.
