Tweet
Hola, visitante! ArtÃculo sobre www replay poker com: Waqf Act: Here is what Supreme Court told Centre about new appointments, 'waqf by user' as next hearing scheduled for May 5. The Supreme Court on Thursday gave the central government a week's time to submit a detailed reply in the challenge to Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 after it was assured that the 'waqf by user' or 'waqf by deed' properties won't be denotified till the next hearing. The Supreme Court has taken a favorable stance on the demands raised by the petitioners regarding appointments of non-Muslims on the board.
INICIAR SESIÓN EN EL SITIO
The Centre told the apex court that that no new appointments will be made to the Central Waqf Council and state boards in the meantime. A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan also recorded the assurance of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, that no appointments in the central Waqf council and boards will be made in the meantime. Mehta said the government won't denotify waqf by deed" and "waqf by user" properties till the next hearing. The CJI said if registration of any waqf property had taken place under the erstwhile 1995 Act, then those properties can't be denotified till the next hearing on May 5. The bench passed the order after Mehta sought a weeks' time to file a preliminary response to the pleas against the newly-amended waqf law. ALSO READ: Will SC stay key provisions of the Waqf Amendment Act today? 'Mamata Rana': Shiv Sena's Mhaske blasts Bengal government, demands CM's ouster over Waqf-related attacks on Hindus 'Yogi is the biggest Bhogi': Mamata Banerjee's sharp retort to UP CM over Waqf protests. "If your lordships will say something about 'waqf by user', what will be the fallout?" he asked. The bench, on the other hand, said it was impossible to deal with a number of pleas on the issue and clarified it would only hear five of them while asking lawyers to decide among themselves who would argue. The petitioners, the bench said, could file their rejoinders to the Centre's reply within five days of the service of the government's response. On Wednesday, the bench was miffed over the inclusion of non-Muslims in the central waqf council and boards and asked the Centre whether it was willing to include Muslims in Hindu religious trusts. The CJI had proposed to issue the notice and to pass an interim order, saying it will "balance the equities". Observing some provisions could have "grave ramifications", particularly those that potentially undermine judicially recognised waqf properties, the CJI proposed the order. "The properties declared as waqfs by the courts should not be de-notified, whether they are by waqf-by-wser or waqf by deed while the court is hearing the challenge to the Waqf Amendment Act 2025," he proposed.
Www replay poker com
INICIAR SESIÓN EN EL SITIO
The Centre told the apex court that that no new appointments will be made to the Central Waqf Council and state boards in the meantime. A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan also recorded the assurance of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, that no appointments in the central Waqf council and boards will be made in the meantime. Mehta said the government won't denotify waqf by deed" and "waqf by user" properties till the next hearing. The CJI said if registration of any waqf property had taken place under the erstwhile 1995 Act, then those properties can't be denotified till the next hearing on May 5. The bench passed the order after Mehta sought a weeks' time to file a preliminary response to the pleas against the newly-amended waqf law. ALSO READ: Will SC stay key provisions of the Waqf Amendment Act today? 'Mamata Rana': Shiv Sena's Mhaske blasts Bengal government, demands CM's ouster over Waqf-related attacks on Hindus 'Yogi is the biggest Bhogi': Mamata Banerjee's sharp retort to UP CM over Waqf protests. "If your lordships will say something about 'waqf by user', what will be the fallout?" he asked. The bench, on the other hand, said it was impossible to deal with a number of pleas on the issue and clarified it would only hear five of them while asking lawyers to decide among themselves who would argue. The petitioners, the bench said, could file their rejoinders to the Centre's reply within five days of the service of the government's response. On Wednesday, the bench was miffed over the inclusion of non-Muslims in the central waqf council and boards and asked the Centre whether it was willing to include Muslims in Hindu religious trusts. The CJI had proposed to issue the notice and to pass an interim order, saying it will "balance the equities". Observing some provisions could have "grave ramifications", particularly those that potentially undermine judicially recognised waqf properties, the CJI proposed the order. "The properties declared as waqfs by the courts should not be de-notified, whether they are by waqf-by-wser or waqf by deed while the court is hearing the challenge to the Waqf Amendment Act 2025," he proposed.
Www replay poker com