NEW DELHI — The parliamentary panel on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill has written to
state governments, seeking details of the disputed Waqf properties within their
jurisdiction.
This was disclosed by Jagdambika Pal, Chairman of the
Joint Committee on Waqf (Amendment) Bill, after a meeting of the panel here on
Thursday.
The meeting was the first after the panel was granted an
extension of tenure till the last week of the Budget Session next year.
Pal said the committee would also call chief secretaries
of state governments to appear before it if required.
The chairman said officials from the Ministry of Minority
Affairs and Ministry of Law and Justice appeared before the committee on
Thursday and submitted responses to queries posed by various members of the
panel.
"The replies run into 887 pages and will be
scrutinised over the next few days," Pal said, adding that the next round
of meetings will be held on December 11 and December 12.
A member of the panel claimed that the responses
submitted by the ministries were drafted poorly and that the opposition would
seek clarifications over those in the next few days.
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill has faced flak from opposition
parties and Muslim groups for its alleged attempts to interfere in religious
matters.
Pal said the parliamentary panel has decided to get an
update on the points made by the Sachar Committee on the Waqf properties that
are allegedly in unauthorised occupation of state governments or their official
agencies.
The Sachar Committee was informed by various state Waqf
boards during 2005-06 about the alleged unauthorised occupation.
According to the information submitted to the committee,
there are 316 such disputed properties in Delhi, 60 in Rajasthan and 42 in
Karnataka that were reported to the Sachar Committee in 2005-06.
There are 53 such properties in Madhya Pradesh, 60 in
Uttar Pradesh and 53 in Odisha.
The states have also been urged to share details of the
cases where their agencies are involved in a legal dispute with Waqf boards
over the ownership or possession of any property, with the panel noting that
the Sachar Committee had stated that its list was not exhaustive.
