Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News? 

Recently, the bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Rajesh Bindal held that a person appointed to the State Waqf Board as a Muslim member of the State Bar Council ceases to be a member of the Waqf Board once their tenure in the Bar Council ends. 

• The Supreme Court held this in the matter of Md. Firoz Ahmad Khalid v. The State of Manipur & Ors.(2025). 

What was the Background of Md. Firoz Ahmad Khalid v. The State of Manipur & Ors. (2025) Case ? 

• An individual named Md. Firoz Ahmad Khalid was elected as a member of the Bar Council of Manipur on 26th December 2022. 
• On 8th February 2023, the Government of Manipur appointed Md. Firoz Ahmad Khalid as a member of the 7th Waqf Board Committee, replacing a previous member who had ceased to be a member of the Bar Council of Manipur. 
• The appointment was made under Section 14(1)(b)(iii) and 14(3) of the Wakf Act, 1995, which allows for Muslim members of State Bar Councils to be appointed to the Waqf Board. 
• The previous member (respondent No. 3) challenged this appointment by filing a writ petition before the High Court of Manipur at Imphal. 
• The Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petition on 23rd August, 2023, ruling that since respondent No. 3 had lost the Bar Council election, he could no longer continue as a member of the Waqf Board. 
• A Division Bench of the High Court, however, overturned this decision on 23rd November 2023, holding that a person could continue to be a member of the Waqf Board even after ceasing to be a member of the Bar Council. 
• This decision was then appealed to the Supreme Court of India, leading to the present case. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court observed that the substantive part of Section 14 of the Wakf Act, 1995, makes it mandatory for a Waqf Board member to fulfill twin conditions: They must be from the Muslim community and must hold a position either as a Member of Parliament, State Legislative Assembly, or Bar Council. 
• The Court noted that an explanation to a statutory provision performs a clarificatory function and cannot be interpreted in a manner that violates the substantive part of the provision. 
• The Court held that there is no intelligible differentia for treating Members of Parliament and State Legislative Assembly differently from Members of Bar Council regarding continuation in the Waqf Board after cessation of their primary position. 
• The Court observed that when a right accrues to a person pursuant to a position they hold, it becomes a qualification, and once such qualification ceases to exist, the person would not be eligible to hold any other post based on their earlier position. 
• The Court determined that an ex-Member of the Bar Council would be eligible for Waqf Board membership only when there is no serving Muslim Member in the Bar Council and no Senior Muslim advocate available. 
• The Court concluded that Explanation II to Section 14(1)(b) of the Act must be given a harmonious construction to mean that the term of a Bar Council Member serving on the Waqf Board is co-terminus with their membership in the Bar Council itself. 
• The Court found that the maxim "expressio unius est exclusio alterius" (the expression of one thing implies the exclusion of another) was not applicable to this case as it would result in an interpretation contrary to the legislative intent. 

What is Section 14 of the Wakf Act, 1995? 

• Section 14 deals with Composition of Board. 
• Section 14(1) establishes that the Waqf Board for a State or the National Capital Territory of Delhi shall consist of a Chairperson and various members elected from different categories. 
• Section 14(1)(b) provides for the election of one or two members from electoral colleges comprising Muslim Members of Parliament, Muslim Members of the State Legislature, Muslim members of the Bar Council, and mutawallis of auqaf with annual income above one lakh rupees. 
• Section 14(1)(b)(iii) specifically designates Muslim members of the Bar Council of the concerned State or Union Territory as eligible for election to the Waqf Board. 
• The proviso to Section 14(1)(b)(iii) empowers the State Government to nominate a senior Muslim advocate in case there is no Muslim member in the Bar Council. 
• Explanation II to Section 14(1)(b) explicitly states that when a Muslim member ceases to be a Member of Parliament or a Member of the State Legislative Assembly, they shall be deemed to have vacated their office as a member of the Board. 
• Section 14(2) prescribes that elections shall be conducted through proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote. 
• The first proviso to Section 14(2) declares that where only one Muslim Member exists in Parliament, State Legislature, or State Bar Council, that member shall be declared elected to the Board. 
• The second proviso to Section 14(2) establishes that where no Muslim Members exist in any category, ex-Muslim Members of Parliament, State Legislature, or ex-members of the State Bar Council shall constitute the electoral college. 
• Section 14(3) grants discretionary power to the State Government to nominate members when it is not reasonably practicable to constitute an electoral college. 
• Section 14(4) mandates that elected members shall outnumber nominated members except as provided under sub-section (3). 
• Section 14(8) requires members to elect a Chairperson from amongst themselves whenever the Board is constituted or reconstituted. 
• Section 14(9) stipulates that members shall be appointed by the State Government through notification in the Official Gazette.