New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday questioned the legal basis for exempting Waqf institutions from payment of court fees in proceedings before Waqf Tribunals, orally observing that any such claim must be backed by a clear statutory provision.
A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Aravind Kumar was hearing a special leave petition (SLP) against orders of the Gujarat High Court which had affirmed decisions of the Gujarat State Waqf Tribunal rejecting suits filed by Waqf institutions over disputes concerning Waqf properties on account of insufficient court fees.
During the hearing, the apex court expressed prima facie doubt over the contention that Waqf bodies are not liable to pay court fees. “How can there be an exemption? What is the law which allows you to take an exemption from court fees?” the Justice Narasimha-led Bench asked.
The petitioner, represented by advocate Ejaz Maqbool, sought time to place additional material on record and indicated that further petitions would be filed challenging the Gujarat High Court’s December 2025 ruling on the issue.
Accepting the request, the apex court granted time and posted the matter for further hearing on August 7, 2026.
The controversy stems from a batch of suits filed by Waqf institutions before the Gujarat State Waqf Tribunal under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, seeking recovery of possession of Waqf properties from tenants and alleged encroachers, along with mesne profits.
The Waqf Tribunal found that the plaintiffs had failed to properly value the proceedings and pay the requisite court fees.
After granting opportunities to cure the defects, it rejected the plaints under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
On December 17, 2025, the Gujarat High Court, in a common judgment delivered by Justice J.C. Doshi, dismissed a large batch of revision petitions filed by various Waqf institutions challenging the Waqf Tribunal’s orders.
The Gujarat High Court framed two central questions for determination — whether the Gujarat Court Fees Act, 2004 applied to proceedings instituted under Chapter VIII of the Waqf Act, and whether the CPC was applicable to such proceedings.
The Waqf institutions had argued that proceedings before the Waqf Tribunal were merely “applications” before a specialised tribunal and not civil suits, that the Waqf Act was silent on court fees, and that imposing ad valorem court fees would defeat the beneficial purpose of legislation enacted to protect Waqf properties.
They also contended that the Waqf Tribunal lacked authority to reject proceedings under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
On the other hand, the state government opposed the plea, maintaining that the Gujarat Court Fees Act applies to all judicial proceedings unless specifically exempted.
It argued that disputes before Waqf Tribunals are adversarial in nature, often involving claims for possession and mesne profits, and therefore partake the character of civil suits attracting court fees.
The Gujarat High Court ultimately held that there was no statutory exemption available to Waqf institutions and that failure to pay requisite court fees justified rejection of the plaint.
It observed that merely describing the initiating proceeding as an “application” could not take it outside the scope of court-fee laws when, in substance, it sought adjudication of rights and recovery of possession.
It further ruled that the Waqf Tribunal, being deemed a civil court for specified purposes, could invoke Order VII Rule 11 CPC to reject proceedings for non-payment of court fees. Subsequently, on January 20, 2026, the Gujarat High Court dismissed another batch of petitions involving identical issues, observing that the reasons recorded in its December 17, 2025 judgment would govern those cases as well.
(IANS)
