Kashmir’s chief cleric Mirwaiz Umar Farooq has expressed concern over an eviction notice issued to the historic Race Course Mosque in New Delhi. The notice, reportedly issued by the Land and Development Office, requires the premises to be vacated within six days. The development has triggered debate over the mosque’s reported Waqf status, its heritage listing and the legal process governing the use of the property.
In a post on social media on October 20, Mirwaiz said the mosque had been recorded as a Waqf property in the 1977 Delhi Gazette and was listed as a heritage site. He questioned why the authorities responsible for protecting Waqf properties had reportedly failed to challenge the eviction notice.
Mirwaiz also connected the issue to broader concerns about the autonomy of Muslim religious institutions and the implications of amendments to Waqf legislation. His comments have added to calls from political leaders and religious organisations for the authorities to review the matter.
Mirwaiz Questions the Protection of Waqf Properties
Mirwaiz said the reported eviction notice raised concerns about the protection available to religious properties recognised under official records. He questioned whether the handling of the Race Course Mosque dispute could have wider implications for other Muslim places of worship.
He also reiterated his opposition to changes in Waqf legislation that he believes increase government control over Muslim religious endowments through appointed representatives.
Waqf properties are assets dedicated for religious, charitable or other purposes recognised under Islamic law. Their administration in India is governed by relevant legislation and overseen by statutory Waqf boards and other competent authorities.
The legal status of a particular property can depend on official records, the circumstances of its dedication, applicable laws and any decisions made by the relevant authorities or courts. In the Race Course Mosque case, the reported 1977 gazette entry and heritage listing are central to the arguments advanced by those seeking protection for the site.
Mirwaiz’s comments represent his position on the dispute. The final legal implications of the records and the validity of the eviction notice must be assessed through the appropriate legal and administrative processes.
Asaduddin Owaisi Seeks Government Intervention
AIMIM president and Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi has separately urged Union Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju to intervene in the matter.
Owaisi questioned why the Delhi Waqf Board had not challenged the eviction-related action despite the mosque’s reported Waqf status. He also highlighted that the Delhi Waqf Board had not been constituted since 2023, raising concerns about the handling of disputes involving Waqf properties.
According to reports, Owaisi argued that the minister should help resolve the issue and ensure that the mosque’s legal claims receive appropriate consideration.
His intervention has broadened the dispute into a political and administrative issue. The questions raised concern not only the status of the mosque but also the responsibilities of the relevant authorities in responding to claims involving religious endowments.
However, the criticism made by political leaders should be distinguished from established findings about administrative responsibility. The reasons for the action and the legal obligations of each authority need to be assessed against the relevant records and procedures.
Land and Development Office Issues Eviction Notice
The Land and Development Office, which administers certain government land in Delhi, reportedly issued a notice requiring the mosque premises to be vacated within six days.
According to reports published on October 20, the authorities consider the occupation of the premises unauthorised. Representatives of the mosque have disputed the action and cited the property's reported Waqf status and heritage recognition.
The mosque’s representatives have also alleged that its electricity and water connections were disconnected and that access to the premises was restricted. These claims have added to concerns about the ability of worshippers to use the site while the dispute continues.
The L&DO’s position concerning government land and the mosque’s reported legal status are separate issues that require examination. A heritage listing does not automatically settle every question about ownership or lawful occupation, just as a government land claim does not by itself resolve all questions concerning an existing religious structure.
The outcome will depend on the applicable legal provisions, official records and any decisions issued by the competent authorities or courts.
Religious Organisations Seek Protection
The eviction notice has also prompted action by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, which has sought government intervention to protect the mosque and its adjoining graveyard.
According to published reports, representatives of the organisation met Kiren Rijiju and submitted a memorandum requesting protection for the site. The organisation also sought the restoration of access and essential services.
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has indicated that it intends to challenge the eviction notice in the Delhi High Court. Any court proceedings could provide an opportunity for the parties to present their arguments and for the relevant records to be examined.
The legal process will be important in determining whether the eviction action can proceed and what protections, if any, apply to the property while the dispute is being considered.
Wider Questions About Waqf Administration
The Race Course Mosque dispute has renewed discussion about the administration of Waqf properties and the responsibilities of the authorities overseeing them.
Waqf boards play an important role in managing properties dedicated for religious and charitable purposes. Disputes can arise over registration, ownership, occupation, historical records and the interpretation of applicable legislation.
The absence of a functioning board can raise questions about how claims are represented and what steps are available to protect properties. Nevertheless, the precise legal consequences depend on the applicable statutory arrangements and the powers of other authorised officials.
Mirwaiz and Owaisi have questioned whether sufficient action has been taken to defend the mosque. Their concerns have been echoed by organisations seeking a review of the eviction notice.
The matter remains a developing legal and administrative dispute. The reported six-day deadline should not be treated as proof that demolition has already occurred or that the final legal outcome has been decided.
As of October 21, 2026, the key issues include the validity of the eviction notice, the status of the property in official records, the responsibilities of the relevant Waqf authorities and the possibility of judicial intervention.
The next steps taken by the Land and Development Office, the religious organisations and the courts will determine how the dispute proceeds. Until further official decisions are available, reports should distinguish the claims made by each side from verified legal findings.
