Paromita Das
GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 18th October. In recent developments, AIUDF chief Badruddin Ajmal stirred a national controversy by claiming that the Parliament building, alongside the areas around Vasant Vihar and the airport in New Delhi, was built on Waqf property. Ajmal’s statement raises significant questions about land ownership in the heart of India’s capital and brings attention to broader, ongoing disputes surrounding Waqf property claims across the country. The controversy isn’t limited to the Parliament building, as similar claims have surfaced in other parts of India, such as the 2022 case in Tamil Nadu where the Waqf Board asserted ownership over seven Hindu villages and a 1,500-year-old temple. These claims have ignited debates about land rights, historical ownership, and the role of religious bodies in the management of public and private properties.
The Allegation: Parliament on Waqf Land?
Badruddin Ajmal’s assertion that the Indian Parliament building stands on Waqf land has sparked considerable debate. The Parliament building, a symbol of India’s democracy and governance, holds immense historical and political significance. Ajmal’s claim suggests that this iconic structure, along with surrounding areas, may have originally been Waqf property—land dedicated for religious or charitable purposes in accordance with Islamic law.
Waqf properties in India are managed by the Waqf Board, a body entrusted with maintaining land and assets dedicated for Muslim religious, educational, and charitable uses. According to Ajmal, the Parliament building and its neighboring areas fall under this category. While the claim remains unsubstantiated by concrete evidence, it has nevertheless triggered political and public reactions, with critics questioning the veracity of such statements.
The Waqf Board’s Reach: A Look at Historical Claims
This isn’t the first time that the Waqf Board’s ownership of land has come into question. The Waqf Board is one of the largest landowners in India, ranking third only after the Indian Railways and the Department of Defence. It controls over 5 lakh properties and approximately 6 lakh acres of land, valued at over Rs 1.20 lakh crore. While the Board’s role is to manage properties for religious and charitable purposes, there have been several disputes regarding the ownership of prime land.
For instance, in 2022, the Waqf Board in Tamil Nadu staked a claim over seven Hindu villages and a 1,500-year-old Sundareswarar temple in Tiruchirappalli. This unexpected move shocked the local Hindu community and raised concerns about the Waqf Board’s growing land claims. The Board asserted that the lands had historically belonged to it, a claim that was contested by local authorities and the affected communities. Such cases reflect the complexity of land ownership in India, where religious, historical, and legal factors intersect, often leading to disputes.
The Congress Connection: Allegations of Favoritism
Ajmal’s claims also bring back to light historical controversies involving the Indian National Congress, which has been accused of facilitating the transfer of public lands to minority religious organizations, particularly the Waqf Board. In 2014, just before the Model Code of Conduct came into effect for the national elections, the Congress government allegedly transferred 123 high-value properties in Delhi to the Delhi Waqf Board. These properties, situated in prime locations such as Connaught Place, Janpath, and Mathura Road, were purportedly denotified from government control and handed over to the Waqf Board with minimal legal scrutiny.
The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), a Hindu nationalist organization, challenged these transfers in court, accusing the Congress-led government of appeasing minority groups for electoral gain. Despite this challenge, the Delhi High Court ordered a status quo in 2014, allowing the Waqf Board to retain control of the properties temporarily. However, the situation took a significant turn in 2023, when the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs under the BJP-led government de-notified the properties, claiming them back from the Waqf Board. A two-member committee, headed by retired Delhi High Court Judge S.P. Garg, was formed to investigate the ownership of these properties. The committee concluded that the Waqf Board had no legal claim to the properties, as it had failed to appear or file appropriate documentation to support its ownership claims.
Land Ownership Disputes: Legal and Religious Dimensions
The issue of Waqf properties raises broader questions about land ownership and religious autonomy in India. Historically, Waqf properties were donated by wealthy Muslim families for religious or charitable purposes, and the Waqf Board was entrusted with their management. Over time, many of these properties have become entangled in legal battles, particularly when their historical ownership is contested or when public infrastructure projects encroach on Waqf land.
Critics of the Waqf Board have argued that it is often unclear whether these land claims are legitimate or exaggerated for political or economic gain. The Board’s status as the third-largest landowner in India has led to questions about transparency and accountability in the management of these properties. At the same time, Waqf properties are protected under specific laws that grant them a degree of legal autonomy, making it difficult for the government to interfere directly in their administration without due process.
The claim that the Parliament building and other prominent areas in Delhi are built on Waqf property may seem implausible, but it highlights a deeper issue: the ambiguity surrounding land ownership in India, particularly when it involves religious bodies. Ajmal’s claim, whether true or not, serves as a reminder that India’s land records are often incomplete or outdated, leading to disputes that can become politically charged. Such assertions must be substantiated with historical evidence and legal documentation to be taken seriously, and any attempt to politicize the issue could have far-reaching consequences.
The case of the 123 properties transferred to the Delhi Waqf Board by the Congress government also underscores the need for transparency in land dealings involving religious institutions. The fact that the Waqf Board controls such vast tracts of land has raised concerns about accountability and governance, particularly when the land in question holds significant commercial or political value.
While religious bodies should be allowed to manage their properties in accordance with the law, there must be stronger safeguards in place to prevent the misuse of this authority. The government should ensure that land ownership disputes, especially those involving religious organizations, are resolved through a transparent legal process, rather than being influenced by political considerations.
Conclusion
The controversy over Badruddin Ajmal’s claims of the Parliament building being Waqf property brings to light longstanding issues surrounding land ownership in India. While the claim itself may lack substantial evidence, it highlights the complexities involved in managing Waqf properties and the potential for disputes over historical ownership. The Waqf Board’s extensive land holdings and the involvement of political parties in transferring high-value properties have raised important questions about governance, accountability, and the intersection of religion and politics in India.
As land ownership disputes continue to surface, it is essential that these matters are addressed with fairness, transparency, and legal precision. Ajmal’s statement may spark further investigations, but it also serves as a reminder that such sensitive issues require careful handling to avoid unnecessary conflicts between religious groups, the state, and the public.
The post Claims of Parliament Building as Waqf Property: Unpacking the Controversy appeared first on Global Governance News- Asia's First Bilingual News portal for Global News and Updates.
