Storm in J&K Assembly over Waqf

Waqf Bill passed amid intense debate, receives Presidential assent

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, which proposed significant changes in regulation of Waqf properties and settlement of disputes, sailed through the Lok Sabha after a midnight vote April 3, capping a marathon 12-hour debate in which the Opposition led by the Congress accused the BJP-led NDA government of interference in “Muslim religious affairs” in contravention of the constitution. The government, which had 293 members in the 543-member Lok Sabha, rejected outright the Opposition’s charge. Both the Union Home Minister, Amit Shah, and the Minority Affairs Minister, Kiren Rijiju, said that the Bill had no provision for government interference and that the Bill, when adopted and implemented, will only help weaker sections of Muslim society. 288 members voted for the path-breaking Bill and 232 against it. The Rajya Sabha, where the NDA did not enjoy a majority, passed the Bill a day later after the over 13-hour fierce debate with 128 votes in favour and 95 against. President Droupadi Murmu signed the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2025 on April 6, and it was made applicable across the nation on April 8, much to the chagrin of vested interests in the community across the country, including Jammu and Kashmir.

Adjournment Motion against its own government

On April 7, the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly met after a 12-day recess. That day, an extraordinary development took place: An adjournment motion was brought by none other than the Treasury Benches in the House, which was disallowed by the Speaker, Abdul Rahim Rather. It happened for the first time in Jammu and Kashmir. The adjournment motion notice was given by the ruling National Conference’s Nazir Gurezi and Tanvir Sadiq. It was supported by seven others, including the Congress MLAs and some Independents. They wanted the Speaker to allow a comprehensive discussion on the Waqf (Amendment) Act. The Speaker, himself a National Conference government appointee, rejected the adjournment motion, saying that the matter was sub-judice, and sub-judice matters could not be discussed in the House. Several parties had gone to the Supreme Court against the Waqf Act. And, when some legislators drew the attention of the Speaker to the fact that the Tamil Nadu’s Assembly had discussed the Waqf Act and also passed a resolution against it, he said that Tamil Nadu Assembly did what it did when the matter had not gone to the Supreme court, and “now the matter is sub-judice.”

The Speaker had not just rejected the adjournment motion. He also had not admitted for debate two resolutions submitted by the Peoples Conference chief and MLA, Sajad Lone, and did not slot a Private Member’s Bill submitted by the Peoples Democratic Party legislator, Waheed Para, despite the fact that it had been initially admitted. The resolutions submitted by Sajad Lone sought the restoration of Jammu and Kashmir’s pre-August 2019 status and the return to Jammu and Kashmir of “prisoners booked under the Public Safety Act (PSA) and lodged in other states, without giving any specific reason.” On the other hand, Waheed Para’s Private Member’s Bill sought restoration of holiday on July 13.

When members of the National Conference joined the Peoples Democratic Party and some Independents in the well of the House to protest against the Speaker’s ruling, the Opposition dismissed the ruling coalition’s actions as “staged”. Opposition leaders, including Sajad Lone, said that the National Conference didn’t just want to “dodge” a debate on the Waqf Act; it also didn’t want pending resolutions on restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir to come before the House.

Interestingly, Sajad Lone also questioned the logic behind a ruling party moving an adjournment motion. “Let me tell my friends in the National Conference that an adjournment motion is a censure motion against the government…Adjournment means discussion, and a reply by the minister in-charge concerned…The only legislative tool available to us to express our collective disapproval against this law (by the Centre) was a resolution…If its (the National Conference’s) song-and-dance performance in the assembly was not theatre, why is the National Conference not bringing a no-confidence motion against its own Speaker for disallowing their adjournment motion?,” he said and asked. He further pointed out that with the Assembly not functioning, “three resolutions seeking restoration of statehood lapsed today”. “So, was this song-and-dance about Waqf or about stalling statehood resolutions,” he asked.

Not just this, Sajad Lone also contested the claim that his resolution on special status could not have been admitted as it was “similar” to what the National Conference had brought in the last assembly session – and that two similar legislations could not be moved in a House within a year. “Our resolution uses the words ‘Article 370’, it uses the word ‘35A’, it uses the words ‘Reorganisation Bill’, it uses the words ‘August 2019’ and it unambiguously states that we need our Article 370 back, we need 35A back,” he said, underlining all that was different from the National Conference’s resolution. Besides, he also contested the claim that his resolution on Jammu and Kashmir prisoners booked under the PSA was disallowed as “the matter was deemed to fall under the purview of the Central government.” “This too didn’t stand. This institution (the assembly) reflects the will of the people of Jammu and Kashmir, and nothing bars them from expressing their views. Whether Delhi agrees with it or not is a different thing altogether,” he said.

Storm in the Assembly

The rejection of the adjournment motion created a storm in the House with Treasury Benches MLA and votaries of discussion on the Waqf Act and their critics, BJP MLAs, created a storm. Actually, the House witnessed heated exchanges between the Treasury and Opposition Benches after Deputy Chief Minister Surinder Choudhary – more loyal than the king — sought the Speaker’s permission for discussion on the contentious Act. During the ruckus, National Conference member Majid Larmi’s black achkan was torn, and other party members held up pieces of the torn dress as symbols of protest against the Act. Disturbed as they were, LoP Sunil Sharma and his party colleagues mounted a vociferous opposition to the adjournment motion. The situation had virtually gone out of control. The Speaker directed the protesting MLAs to return to their seats. Even after his direction, the bitter war of words on both sides continued. The BJP members shouted “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” and “Vande Mataram” slogans. The non-BJP MLAs, including those belonging to the ruling party, raised slogans like “Allah hu Akbar” and “Nara-e Takbeer”. “Allah hu Akbar” and “Nara-e Takbeer” slogans provoked the BJP members. They stood up and chanted such slogans as “Bharat Mata Ki Jai”, “Goondagardi nahi chalegi” and “Jahan balidaan hueey Mukherjee, wo Kashmir humara hai”, which were countered by the Kashmiri Muslim legislators with slogans like “Nara-e-Taqbeer, Allah-O-Akbar” and “Kala kanoon radh karo” (cancel the black law). Some Opposition members even ran up to Treasury Benches and tried to snatch copies of the Bill they were holding, leading the Speaker to adjourn the House for the day before matters further escalated. This came after the House had already seen one adjournment for 15 minutes.

Protests outside the house

The rejection of the adjournment motion not just infuriated the Kashmiri Muslim MLAs, without exception. The Speaker’s action also didn’t go well with the All-Party Hurriyat Conference (APHC) Chairman, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, and on-the-spot Mehbooba Mufti. Reacting to the Speaker’s decision, the Mirwaiz said: “It is ridiculous and condemnable that Tamil Nadu which only has 6 percent Muslim population passes a strong anti-Waqf resolution in its assembly while the Muslim-majority Jammu and Kashmir Assembly’s Speaker is struggling and refusing, by hiding behind technicalities, to discuss this deeply concerning issue…Rather should keep in mind that the strong mandate the NC had got was based on its promise ‘to safeguard the interests of the people, being trampled upon since August 2019.” He also asked: “Why is he (Speaker) capitulating so meekly?”

On the other hand, Mehbooba Mufti posted on X that the Speaker’s action was “profoundly disappointing”. “Despite securing a strong mandate, the government appears to have completely yielded to the BJP’s anti-Muslim agenda, cynically attempting to appease both sides,” she wrote. Besides, like the Mirwaiz, she also gave the example of the resolution passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly against the Waqf Bill. She said: “In Jammu and Kashmir, the only Muslim-majority region, it’s alarming that a supposedly people-centric government lacks the courage even to debate this critical issue.”

Very significantly, the storm in the House over the Waqf Act coincided with the Omar Abdullah-led government according a warm welcome in Srinagar to Union Minister Kiren Rijiju, who had piloted the Waqf Bill in the Parliament as the Minority Affairs Minister. The highly radicalised daughter of Mehbooba Mufti, Iltija Mufti, and Sajad Lone, reacted sharply. Iltija Mufti posted on X: “What’s left to say when the Chief Minister of India’s only Muslim-majority state gives a red carpet welcome to the BJP minister who introduced the Waqf Bill meant to disempower & debilitate Muslims?…Stands in sharp contrast to Tamil Nadu CM, who showed spine by swiftly introducing…” As for Sajad Lone, he wrote on X: “The least the Muslims of India deserved was that in Jammu and Kashmir, the only Muslim-majority province in India, the Chief Minister, as a mark of protest, stays away from Mr Kiren Rijju…Instead, he tags along with Farooq Sahib as well. What a shame!”[1]

Chaos and anarchy

The House witnessed chaotic scenes and anarchy on April 8 as well. As members of the ruling coalition, including Deputy Chief Minister Surinder Choudhary, joined the demand for a discussion on the Waqf Amendment Act, the Speaker said that he had decided to disallow it in line with the rules and will not change his ruling. On Deputy Chief Minister and other ministers joining the protesting members in pressing for a discussion on the Act, the Speaker, in fact, said it did not matter to him who was raising the demand. “Whether it is the government, minister, opposition members, or somebody else, I have to weigh the statement as per the rules to take a call. If the rules do not allow it, it hardly matters to me who is making the statement. I have made a decision after going through the rules, and I will not change my decision,” the Speaker said.

“The matter has been challenged before the Supreme Court, so the notices cannot be admitted because as per rule 58(vii) (which states that) the motion shall not deal with any matter which is under adjudication by a court of law having jurisdiction in any part of India,” the Speaker also told the House, drawing protests from members.

“If they (protesting MLAs) are not allowing the House to work, it is their own loss and the loss of the public because the last three days (of the budget session) were meant for private members resolutions and bills and eight each calling attention motions besides 40 to 50 questions of public importance…The legislators should work for the purpose for which they have been sent to the assembly by the people.

People have high hopes for us, and we should try to fulfil their aspirations. After my ruling (given on April 7), they should have accepted it. I am there because of their confidence, and if they are not accepting (my ruling), it is their loss and the loss of the public…Some members said that the Supreme Court is yet to serve the notices on the Waqf issue, and hence, the House can discuss the issue and pass a resolution. But Rule 58(ix) clearly states that the assembly has no domain over legislation passed in Parliament. The law can be revoked only by Parliament or the judiciary,” the Speaker further said in his bid to conciliate the protesting legislators.

The Speaker also took the opportunity to express his view on the no-confidence motion moved against him by three Opposition legislators. In this regard, the speaker said: “They are welcome to bring it before the House. What is the problem? They have this right, and the House will decide its fate. If the House has no confidence, then I have no right to be there.”

Amid heated exchanges in the House over the need for a discussion on the Waqf Act, three Opposition members had on April 8 submitted a notice to the Assembly Secretariat expressing their intent to move a resolution for the removal of Abdul Rahim Rather as Speaker. Addressed to the Assembly Secretary, the notice was signed by Sajad Ghani Lone and Mir Mohammad Fayaz, and Rafiq Ahmed Naik of the Peoples Democratic Party.

“The decision stems from widespread outrage within the House over the Speaker’s actions, including the rejection of discussions on an adjournment motion and the refusal to entertain a resolution brought forward by the Opposition parties,” read the notice. “Such conduct undermines the democratic principles and procedures governing this esteemed institution, prompting this resolution to address the matter,” it also read.[2]

The Speaker rejected the no-confidence motion.

The nature of pandemonium and chaos in the House could be gauged from the fact that the protesting Deputy Chief accused the Speaker again and again of not allowing members to speak, and the National Conference and other Kashmiri legislators not yielding and insisting on a discussion on the Waqf Act. It could also be seen from the fact that Peoples Democratic Party legislator Waheed Para had to be marshalled out of the House. Para had come near the Well of the House. He was trying to draw the Speaker’s attention to the fact that he had moved a fresh resolution against the Waqf Act, and the Speaker had said: “Koi resolution nahi la sakte aap (You cannot bring any resolution).” “You cannot undo what Parliament has done,” the Speaker also told the protesting National Conference MLAs.

As repeated pleas by the Speaker asking legislators to take their seats fell on deaf ears, he adjourned the House for 30 minutes. When the House reassembled after 30 minutes, the National Conference members again stood up on their seats to reiterate their demand. The Deputy Chief Minister also stood up. He asked the Speaker to allow members to speak on the issue. “This is the concern of the members of the House. We are elected public representatives, but you don’t allow them (agitating National Conference members) to speak,” he said. Not just this, he further said: “BJP ke kehne pe yeh House nahi chalega (The proceedings will not be dictated by the BJP).” This made the situation all the more awkward for the Speaker.

The situation was such that the Speaker was left with no other option but to adjourn the House for the second straight day without transacting any business.[3]

Disorder continued on the third straight day (April 9), which was also the last day of the budget session as per calendar. The session had commenced on March 3, 2025. While on April 7 and 8, chaotic scenes and protests over the Waqf Amendment Act forced multiple adjournments of the House and total washout of the proceedings, on April 9, there were additional issues of unemployment and daily wagers’ regularisation. The issues were raised by the BJP lawmakers. In the morning, the Speaker adjourned the House till 1 pm as the pandemonium prevailed right from the word “Go” with both sides accusing each other of resorting to “dramabaazi.”

As soon as the House assembled for the day’s proceedings, National Conference’s Nazir Gurezi and Mubarak Gul rose from their seats and asked the Speaker to allow discussion on the Waqf Amendment Act. “We, too, have read the rules. A half-hour discussion can be allowed. Just use your discretion,” said Gurezi.

Meanwhile, the BJP members started protesting. They said that their MLA, Balwant Singh Mankotia, had moved adjournment motions on unemployment and daily wagers’ regularisation. In response, the Speaker said that “the BJP member’s resolutions seeking discussion on unemployment and daily wagers, could not be allowed as the issues were not a recent occurrence.” His ruling infuriated the BJP members. They started protesting. The Speaker tried his best to resume Question Hour in the din, asking BJP MLA Sunil Bhardwaj to raise his question,n but it could not happen because of “absolute chaos from both sides.”

Accusing the BJP of doing politics and resorting to “dramabaazi” on unemployment and daily wagers’ issues, Gurezi stated that the Act was an injustice to the Muslims. “They did nothing for them when they were in power during the past 10 years,” he said.

Provoked, the BJP members led by the LoP Sunil Sharma entered the well amid slogans and few sat on dharna there. They too traded counter-charges of “dramabazi”, raising slogans “Dramabaazi Band Karo.”

As both sides continued to protest, the House was adjourned for ten minutes. After adjournment of the House, while the BJP MLAs outside the House sat on dharna on the stairs leading to the legislature complex, the National Conference members protested inside the House. When the House reassembled, the Speaker, referring to chaos prevailing in the House for the past three days, reiterated that he had disallowed the adjournment motions seeking discussion on the Waqf Amendment Act as the rules did not permit him. Now it was time for the National Conference and other Kashmiri MLAs to protest and disrupt the proceedings.

It was under these circumstances that the Speaker adjourned the House sine die. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, who hardly attended the House for three days, was not in the House when it was adjourned. He arrived half an hour after the adjournment.[4]

After the Speaker adjourned the House sine die, the National Conference chief spokesperson, Tanvir Sadiq, announced that the party will approach the Supreme Court by filing a writ petition challenging the Waqf Amendment Act, which it did. He was acting as per the instructions given to him by the party president, Farooq Abdullah. “The legal battle over the legislation will now be taken to the highest court of the country…The National Conference views the Act as a constitutionally alarming intrusion into the religious affairs of the Muslim community,” he said while talking to reporters outside the Assembly.[5]

Verbal duels

Kashmir continued to witness verbal duels over the Waqf issue and over the Speaker’s role and the role of the National Conference after the budget session was over. Significantly, both Farooq Abdullah and Omar Abdullah, who earlier had bemoaned that the Speaker didn’t allow discussion on the Waqf Act, expressed complete solidarity with the Speaker and defended his no-discussion-on-Waqf Act-ruling.

Speaking to the media in Srinagar, Farooq Abdullah said: “It was prudent for the Speaker to block the debate on the Waqf (Amendment) Act, given that the matter is currently under consideration in the Supreme Court. This law is unconstitutional. The Speaker made the right call in not allowing discussion while the case is before the Supreme Court. Once the verdict comes, we can deliberate on it…The Opposition benches offered ‘no meaningful critique’ and engaged in opposition for the sake of opposition,” he said.[6]

Omar Abdullah defended the Speaker a day later (April 15). Clarifying the party’s position, he responded to the controversy by stressing procedural correctness. “The Speaker made everything clear on the last day. Perhaps, the mistake by the (ruling coalition’s) members was that they brought an adjournment motion. An adjournment motion is only brought to discuss the works of the Jammu and Kashmir government because the government has to respond. Tell me, had that adjournment motion been accepted, how would we have responded as the Waqf Bill was not brought by us. It was passed by the Centre in the Parliament,” he said.[7]

The statements of Farooq Abdullah and Omar Abdullah in support of the Speaker evoked a sharp reaction from the Peoples Conference and the Peoples Democratic Party. Reacting to the statement of Farooq Abdullah, Sajad Lone referred to what he called “inconsistencies” in the National Conference’s approach to the legislation. “They have 50 MLAs. The Speaker belongs to their party. I fail to understand against whom they were protesting and raising concerns within the assembly. And now Farooq Abdullah comes out in support of the Speaker. This is a tremendous mockery…A historic opportunity was missed to either pass a resolution or at least conduct a meaningful discussion on the contentious Waqf Bill. It could have sent a powerful message from the only Muslim-majority province in the country, but instead it appeared as though National Conference was fighting against itself merely to sabotage the discussion and to appease New Delhi,” he, on April 14, among other things, said in Srinagar.[8]

Sajad Lone took on Omar Abdullah a day later (April 15) and launched a sharp attack on him. He accused him and the National Conference of “engineering disruptions” in the assembly to block the passage of a resolution on the Waqf Amendment Act. He described the Speaker’s move and the National Conference’s role as a “case of criminal negligence in the only Muslim-majority Assembly in the country and questioned the very intent behind the sustained disruption.

“A group of 50 legislators was deliberately mobilized to shout down proceedings for three days, stalling any meaningful business in the House…If he, in just his second term, was able to recognise the error immediately, it was implausible that veteran National Conference lawmakers did not…The chaos in the House (was) a coordinated performance, with legislators climbing desks and shouting like schoolchildren,” Sajad Lone said. He also asked if “the party (National Conference) was being led by people incapable of understanding basic Assembly procedures.”[9]

As for the Peoples Democratic Party, it on April 15 accused the National Conference of letting down the Muslims of the country by not raising its voice against the Waqf Amendment Act. “Farooq Abdullah should tell us why his party did not bring a resolution in the assembly against the Waqf Bill despite the fact that Jammu and Kashmir is the only Muslim majority state in India. It is not just the Muslims in Jammu and Kashmir who are looking up to us; it is also the Muslims in the rest of the country, and this government, the National Conference, has terribly let them down…You do not want to talk about Muslims. You are normalising (abrogation of) (Article) 370, and whatever wrongs happened with Muslims after (abrogation of) (Article) 370. We know Waqf is anti-Muslim. It has been brought to disempower Muslims. The National Conference does not even want to talk about that because it is power-hungry; they want power and the chair…(Farooq) Abdullah should say what it has done now. His son (Omar Abdullah) is the CM with 50 MLAs. Karnataka, West Bengal, and Tamil Nadu decided to bring resolutions against Waqf, what was our CM doing?… The government did not bring a resolution against Waqf as the National Conference has an ‘understanding’ with the BJP. He (Omar Abdullah) was roaming around with Union Minister Kiren Rijiju in the Tulip Garden. They already have an understanding with the BJP that they will neither talk about Waqf, nor bring a resolution against it…Saying that the Speaker did the right thing as the matter was sub-judice is a very convenient excuse. Article 370 is also sub-judice, but you (National Conference) keep on saying that you are fighting for it,” the Peoples Democratic Party said.

“The National Conference MLAs should have brought a no-confidence motion against the Speaker if they were angry with him. There is a tacit understanding. The National Conference MLAs did not talk about Waqf, it was only our MLA (Waheed Para) who did. If you were angry with the Speaker, then why did you not bring a no-confidence motion against him?… The National Conference has ‘thrown’ Kashmiri Muslims ‘under the bus’, and is now even ‘normalizing the disempowerment’ of Muslims of the country…Statehood is not our goal. We belong to a state that had its own constitution, law, and flag. We have to fight for that thing as well. The National Conference is running the BJP’s agenda. Statehood is the BJP’s agenda, why should we run the BJP’s agenda,” the Mehbooba Mufti’s party further said to paint the Abdullahs and their party black.[10]

What the Peoples Democratic Party said provoked the National Conference. Launching a counterattack on it on April 15, the National Conference’s chief spokesperson, Tanvir Sadiq, accused it of being part of a “plan to marginalize” Muslims. He said that it was none other than Mufti Muhammad Sayeed himself who had converted the Aquaf into the Waqf Board and that his party inflicted two major damages on Jammu and Kashmir — first in 2003, when the Aquaf was turned into the Waqf Board, and again in 2015, when the party joined hands with the BJP to form the government.

“In 2003, the late Mufti Mohd Sayeed converted the Aquaf into the Waqf Board, and Nayeem Akhtar was made the Vice Chairman. It started then. I believe it was an old plan, with the PDP and Mufti being part of it, to marginalise Muslims…The destruction began when control was handed over to the government…If the PDP hadn’t ‘traded off’ Jammu and Kashmir for power, ‘we wouldn’t be suffering today.’ Even now, they haven’t mended their ways, and they’ve been reduced to just three members,” he, inter alia, said while tearing into the Mufti’s party and in defence of the National Conference.[11]

What happened in the Legislative Assembly between April 7 and 9 and outside the House between April 10 and 15 established that all the Muslim MLAs were on the same page and a divided house at the same time. However, it was the National Conference that appeared confused and directionless. Besides, what happened in the House also established that there was hardly anything that was common between Jammu province and the Kashmir Valley.

Note:
1. Text in Blue points to additional data on the topic.
2. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of PGurus.

Reference: –

[1] No Waqf Act debate in J-K House, Opposition sees NC ‘duplicity’ in Speaker move – Apr 8, 2025, The Indian Express

[2] Will Not Change Decision, Followed Rules: Speaker On Waqf Issue As Protests By Ruling, Oppn Parties Rock J&K Assembly – Apr 8, 2025, Daily Excelsior

[3] After shouting, shoving in J&K Assembly, a notice seeking Speaker’s removal – Apr 9, 2025, The Indian Express

[4] Budget session ends on discordant note – Apr 10, 2025, Greater Kashmir

[5] NC to move SC against Waqf Amendment Bill, says Sadiq – Apr 9, 2025, News Arena India

[6] Farooq Abdullah Backs Speaker’s Call on Waqf Law, Urges PM Modi to Intervene in Saudi Visa Ban – Apr 14, 2025, Kashmir Life

[7] Appropriate time has come’: Why Omar Abdullah is ‘hopeful’ of J&K statehood restoration – Apr 15, 2025, The Indian Express

[8] Farooq Abdullah defending speaker’s decision on Waqf bill discussion a mockery: Sajad Lone – Apr 14, 2025, Greater Kashmir

[9] Lone accuses Omar, NC of engineering disruptions in Assembly – Apr 16, 2025, Daily Excelsior

[10] Waqf Act Iltija says NC has ‘thrown’ Kashmiri Muslims under the bus – Apr 15, 2025, The Week

[11] NC accuses PDP of converting Aquaf into Waqf to marginalise Muslims – Apr 16, 2025, Daily Excelsior

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.

The post Storm in J&K Assembly over Waqf appeared first on PGurus.