Mutawalli Moves Supreme Court, Says Centre’s UMEED Portal Makes Waqf Uploads ‘Technically Impossible’
The writ petition challenged the Centre’s mandatory digital waqf-upload regime, alleging that the UMEED Portal was legally incompatible and technically unworkable for thousands of waqf properties across multiple states
The plea alleged defects in the UMEED Portal as a Mutawalli from Madhya Pradesh challenged the nationwide digital uploading mandate for waqf properties
A writ petition has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the enforceability of the nationwide digital uploading mandate for waqf properties under Section 3B of the Waqf Act, 1995, alleging that the Centre’s newly notified UMEED Portal is “structurally defective” and incapable of handling the statutory requirements, especially for the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Filed under Article 32, the petition seeks a mandamus against the Ministry of Minority Affairs, arguing that the UMEED Portal; the only mechanism notified under the UMEED Rules, 2025, is neither technically functional nor legally compatible with the waqf structures in several states.
According to WAMSI data cited in the petition, 30 States and Union Territories and 32 Waqf Boards have reported approximately 8.72 lakh waqf properties spread across more than 38 lakh acres nationwide, of which 4.02 lakh are categorised as “Waqf by User.” Yet, a news report dated December 5, 2025 highlighted the massive shortfall in digital uploads. Uttar Pradesh, with 1.4 lakh properties, had uploaded only 35 percent. West Bengal managed a mere 12 percent, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka about 10 percent each, while Punjab was the only major state crossing 80 percent.
The petitioner, a Mutawalli from Madhya Pradesh, argues that the Portal is entirely inconsistent with the State’s waqf framework. MP’s waqf properties are overwhelmingly Section 5 Survey/Gazette-notified waqfs, not “Waqf by User” properties. Yet, Section 5.1 of the UMEED Portal’s user manual does not offer any option for registering Survey/Gazette waqfs, allegedly forcing users to make an “unlawful and false declaration” in order to proceed.
The petition filed through AoR Vaibhav Choudhary states that such forced misclassification violates both statutory duties and fiduciary obligations of a Mutawalli.
The plea further details a series of nationwide technical failures that, according to the petitioner, have crippled the digital exercise. Citing a 195-page compilation of grievances prepared by the Ministry itself, the petition lists widespread issues including missing districts and villages, rejection of valid land-record formats, inability to create user IDs, login failures, broken approval workflows, system crashes, and recurring “undefined errors.” These issues, it says, have persisted throughout the six-month statutory window.
In Madhya Pradesh, the technical defects are compounded by the portal’s refusal to accept local land record formats, such as large khasra numbers, decimal-based area entries, sheet numbers and multi-plot records, rendering compliance “impossible.” Failure to upload, however, exposes Mutawallis to penalties under Section 61 of the Waqf Act, including removal, prosecution and loss of administrative rights.
The petition argues that penal consequences for failing to perform an act made impossible by the State violate Articles 14, 21, 25, 26 and 300A of the Constitution.
While Section 3B permits extension of the upload deadline until June 2026, the petitioner contends that an extension is meaningless when the portal itself cannot process lawful entries. The plea also notes that key provisions of the Waqf Act related to this digital process; including Sections 3B, 36 and 61, are already under constitutional challenge before the Supreme Court, making strict enforcement premature.
The petitioner has sought directions to the Union Government to rectify the UMEED Portal, include an option for Survey/Gazette waqfs, resolve the documented technical defects across states, provide an alternative lawful mechanism for compliance until the portal is functional, and suspend penal consequences arising from non-compliance caused by the system’s own defects.
Notably, on December 1, the Apex Court had refused to extend the six-month deadline for mandatory registration of Waqf properties on the UMEED Portal under the Waqf Amendment Act 2025, directing applicants instead to seek relief before the Waqf Tribunal.
In a related news on November 3, 2025, the Court had agreed to relist for hearing a plea filed by AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi seeking an extension of time for the mandatory registration of all Waqf properties, including those categorised as ‘Waqf by user’, under the Centre’s UMEED portal.
Previously, Pasha had informed the Bench that while the amended law provided six months for mandatory registration, five of those months had already elapsed since the Supreme Court’s interim order in September, leaving just one month remaining.
Earlier, on September 15, the Apex Court had refused to stay the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in its entirety.
Case Title: Hashmat Ali v. Union of India & Ors.
Bench: Supreme Court of India (hearing expected)