By Charu Bahri
IndianMuslims.info

Last part of the two part series on Waqf in India. Read the first part here.

The lucre of Waqf properties to persons having unscrupulous aims to make it big in politics by misusing funds donated at holy shrines or by swaying the opinion of people reposing their faith in a Waqf property continues to this day.

Even though Muslims have been well-represented in the managing Boards and Councils, tales of misuse of Waqf properties for personal benefit abound. For instance, New Delhi based NGO Hum Aapke has filed a public interest litigation (PIL) alleging misappropriation of the income of the well-known dargah of Hazrat Nizamuddin Aulia by those responsible for its upkeep. For instance, they state that the tradition of distributing ‘chadars’ offered at the dargah among the poor people has been abused with the offerings being sold in the market.

They have sought enactment of a law that would bring its affairs under central control, akin to the current mode of governance of the dargah of Hazrat Moinuddin Chishti in Ajmer or by the constitution of a duly registered management committee represented by Government officials and eminent personalities. Apparently, the PIL implies that the Delhi Waqf Board has failed in its managerial duty.

However, when www.indianmuslims.info spoke to chairman of the Delhi Waqf Board Chaudhary Mateen Ahmad, he spoke of the difficulties of overseeing Waqf properties such as the dargah of Hazrat Nizamuddin Aulia where those involved in the day-to-day management of the property try to portray that the property is not under the Waqf administration. He admitted that the Delhi Waqf Board got involved by way of a committee in the financial aspects of the dargah only after the PIL was filed, but spoke of a powerful nexus protecting the peerzadas freedom to manage as they please, and the four hundred people living on the property and perhaps off the income of the dargah. His lament was that powerful leaders of the community call political leaders and say that the peerzadas work is not to be interfered with, making the work of the Waqf Board that much more difficult.

A conversation with the office of the chairman of the Rajasthan Waqf Board, Slawad Khan yielded similar views. On being asked whether central management of Ajmer Sharif implies that it has more funds for its upkeep, the official was quick to respond that even if the Rajasthan Waqf Board had control of the property, there would be no paucity of funds for its maintenance. He also pointed out that it is the local management committee of the Ajmer dargah that desires to be under central control, so that the local Waqf office cannot supervise and monitor its work.

The moot point is then whether central control would bode well for the future of the dargah of Hazrat Nizamuddin Aulia in Delhi.

In an exclusive interview to www.indianmuslims.info, member of the management committee of the Ajmer Sharif Zahoor Baba, whose family has been involved with the management of the affairs of the dargah since many generations, explained that the separation of its affairs from the control of the local Waqf Board is advantageous, as Boards are invariably constituted of members installed by the ruling state Government, persons who are often veritable puppets of local Governments who often have no knowledge of matters relating to the property and hence whose interference is detrimental to its smooth running. I broached the subject of the PIL pending verdict relating to the dargah of Hazrat Nizamuddin Aulia and he said any corruption or misuse of offerings at holy shrines hurts the sentiments of the huge number of faithful followers.

Apparently then safeguarding these shrines has much to do with upholding the spirit of Islam dealing with the very creation of these Awqaf. As opposed to claiming that the end of Muslim rule is the reason for the poor upkeep and corruption associated with many shrines, the Muslim community would do well to look within to those among them whose intent with regard to the upkeep of these properties is questionable.

As an example, Muslim clerics have taken objection to the creation of an all-women committee to manage eleven Waqf properties in the twin-cities of Hyderabad-Secunderabad. The clerics have sited the move as against the spirit of the Waqf Act. Their anger, it must be said, seems to be directed to the fact that women have been entrusted with the responsibility, which in no way retracts from the original purpose of a Waqf. It would perhaps be more apt for them to direct their interest to monitoring the accurate use of donations by the committee for the maintenance of the institutions and welfare activities.

Yet another instance of debate is the Uttar Pradesh’s Sunni Waqf Board claim to ownership of the Taj Mahal, a UNESCO recognized monument of cultural heritage and one of the eight wonders of the world managed by Archaeological Society of India since 1920. The UNESCO recognition has led to the Taj Mahal being declared a protected monument of national importance under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958.

Given the fact that not all the over 100,000 properties the UP Sunni Waqf Board manages have been ideally maintained the issue becomes one of saving a monument of national prestige on the one hand and on the other, a more contentious one of the concerned Board desirous of filling its coffers with seven percent of the approximately $4.36m gate money it stands to gain if it wins the case. Even as historian Irfan Habib has clarified that the Taj Mahal was indeed a Waqf property of which the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan was the custodian, the fact that the Mughal empire or the emperor is no more raises the question of succession of custodian of the Waqf. In this case, however, a move by the Centre to ensure central ownership of the Taj Mahal seems imminent.

Summing up, the need of the hour is perhaps a greater interest and involvement of the Muslim community to gauge and monitor the purity of intent of those responsible for the management of Awqaf at all levels.