The Karnataka High Court has rejected a recent Public Interest Litigation over the state government's latest decision to suspend mutations of property in cases related to the disputed properties on Waqf land. Public Interest Litigation said the interim stay in the transfer of ownership records for properties in disputed situations violated the rights of the individuals as well as registration processes. But the High Court refused to give up on the state government's move saying this was in the powers given to the government so that there would be clarity and avoid misuse by parties involved in sensitive land cases.Case Background The dispute was due to claims regarding Waqf properties. Many such properties were involved in disputed ownership claims and title transfers were hazy. The state government has intervened in the matter, issued a notification stopping the mutation of property on lands where it suspected involvement in any kind of Waqf disputes. This is only for the protection of interests — both of bona fide owners as well as those of the Waqf boards — till the disputes are resolved. The petitioners filed the PIL stating that this decision taken by the state was arbitrary, unconstitutional, and caused unnecessary hardship to the property owners. Indefinite halting of mutations resulted in deprivation of rights of transferring or updating the record of ownership which also led to the administrative delays and loss of economy. Observations of the Court The Karnataka High Court considered the powers of the state and the rationale behind its decision. It observed that the nature of disputes in Waqf property is often overlapping and complicated, hence requiring careful study to avoid illegal transfers or encroachments. In the opinion of the bench, the action taken by the government was preventive and temporary, with the intent of securing integrity in ownership records during a dispute. The Court dismissed the arguments of the petitioners and said that the state government acted in its jurisdiction to prevent fraudulent transactions and to keep matters transparent. The bench also stated that the notification of the state did not permanently restrain mutations but suspended them for the settlement of disputes. The judgment was a "reasonable restriction" in the interest of the larger public and did not offend fundamental rights. Importance of the Decision This decision by the Court stresses that properties dedicated to charitable or religious purposes need protection. The decision further adds to the responsibility of the government in safeguarding the Waqf lands from misuse or unauthorized transfers. The decision also reminds of the balance of individual rights and the intervention of the state when it involves public or religious interest.