One such recent act of laying claim by the Karnataka Board of Waqfs over 17 heritage monuments situated within the magnificent Bidar Fort in Karnataka has widely fueled a discussion in the region regarding jurisdiction and ownership and the consequent conservation of those significant cultural assets. The fort, one of Karnataka’s historically richest and architecturally most impressive sites, is also a place of deep connection to the Bahmani Sultanate-a considerable medieval power-once contending for most of the Deccan region. The Waqf Board claim stretches over several of the most iconic landmarks within the fort, including several tombs and mosques that have stood witness for centuries to the legacy of the Sultanate. Among these structures are the famous “16 Khamba Mosque,” a place of faith crucial to the terrain for its unique architectural piece, and the 14 royal tombs where some Bahmani rulers and their family members lie buried, including Sultan Ahmed Shah IV and Ahmed Shah Wali. In addition to being religious and architectural gems, these monuments are a testification of cultural heritage Islamic enough for the region.
This statement of ownership by the Waqf Board brings up a whole host of serious questions as to the future management of such sites, especially with the ASI long considered the custodian of the fort and its monuments. Local sources reveal that the silence of the Waqf Board and the ASI has further worsened this confusion because the ASI was not informed about the claim. This is why there has been much controversy in quizzing who has the rights to conserve, maintain, and control the fort’s monuments. It has, therefore, not only drawn attention to the legal and administrative complexities involved in heritage preservation but also brought out all the implications of religious and historical property claims in a state as culturally diverse as Karnataka in a way. This debate is surely going to have a precedent effect for issues of similar nature all over the country as India tries to manage the overlap between religious endowments, heritage conservation, and legal ownership over historical sites.
The Bidar Fort and Its Heritage Structures
Bidar Fort is a very important historical and cultural landmark in Karnataka, known for its architectural beauty and because of its historical significance. The fort was built in the 15th century during the Bahmani rule, and houses many centuries-old buildings, including the famous “16 Khamba” or Sixteen Pillar Mosque, besides 14 tombs of the Bahmani rulers and their family members. Among the most prominent interred here are Sultan Ahmed Shah IV, Sultan Ahmed Shah Wali, and a long list of other royalty in the Bahmani line. For nearly a century, the Archaeological Survey of India has acted as custodian of Bidar Fort, which means it bears responsibility for the monuments contained within its precincts. However the latest claim by the Waqf Board would challenge questions of ownership and responsibility over the structures. According to the reports, it is said that the Waqf Board never brought this claim to the notice of the ASI, which further escalates the situation.
Waqf Board’s Perspective and Response
An unnamed senior official from the Waqf Board discussed the latest twists and turns of events, telling that while the Board claims these monuments as its own, no official notices were published to the ASI. This official was also perturbed by misinformation going on in the country, which may eventually malign the Muslim community as a whole. This isn’t to create obstacles but after realizing the public backlash the Board decided to cancel these notices,” he further elaborated. “ Due to furore, we have with drawn all notices it’s both unjust and illegal to evict people when people have been here such long time,” said this official.
The Broader Land Dispute: Farmers’ Claims in Vijayapura District
Beyond the issue of Bidar Fort, this has become a disputable issue and created apprehensions among farmers of other districts of Karnataka. For example, in Vijayapura district, farmers complained that Waqf Board has identified their lands as belonging to the Waqf board. Farmers say they received notices about the lands and that important land records such as RTC (Record of Rights, Tenancy, and Crops), and the “pahani” and mutation registers, were tampered with without any proper procedure.
BJP MP Tejasvi Surya raised this point by requesting Jagdambika Pal, Chairperson of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2024, to take up the matter and visit Karnataka’s Hubballi and Vijayapura to hear the grievances of farmers affected by the move of the Waqf Board. Pal agreed to these regions and on November 7 went visiting these regions, having talks with farmer organizations, community leaders, and other stakeholders so as to hear their concerns.
Political Responses and the Chief Minister’s Assurance
In the wake of protests by farmers in Vijayapura, Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah promised they were not going to be dispossessed. Stating the concern as being explained to him, the Chief Minister ordered withdrawal of notices issued to farmers. His interference was an attempt to reduce the tension between farmers and the Waqf Board and bring down the contentious land issues that may once again flare up.
Legal and Cultural Implications
This is exactly where the whole Waqf Board has come forth, more or less making it sound like a war of ideologies over ownership and administrative handling over monuments in these heritage structures. As vociferous as this sounds in terms of ASI being the mainstream protector, Waqf Board has highlighted a pretty significant distinction and clash between rich heritage protection and endowment-based rights for religions. Indeed, this situation raises issues of land and agri-farmers, whose agricultural lands happen to fall under disputed ownership.
The visit of the JPC and its subsequent public hearings in Hubballi and Vijayapura suggest that the government is ready to hear such citizens and take appropriate steps for the redressal of grievance. It will be interesting to see how the Karnataka government balances heritage protection and private ownership rights in lands in the complicated web of laws. As the JPC, ASI, Waqf Board, and local administration work towards a resolution, this controversy also reinforces the urgency for this debate to be conducted with transparency and sensitivity towards historical monuments and religious endowment lands. This case will be instrumental in deciding a crucial precedent for future similar cases found all across India, where land rights and heritage and religious endowments frequently come into play.
Conclusion
There has been a great deal of controversy surrounding the Karnataka Waqf Board’s designation of 17 monuments inside Bidar Fort as its property, particularly in relation to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which has long been in charge of these historic sites. Concerns about the legitimacy and openness of such claims have been raised by the Board’s activities in the local community and political circles. Officials have opposed the Waqf Board’s notifications, which have not yet been legally sent to the ASI. They claim that this action might damage the Muslim community’s reputation and lead to needless strife.
The participation of political leaders, Including Joint Parliamentary Committee Chairperson Jagdambika Pal and BJP MP Tejasvi Surya, highlights the mounting apprehension over the Board’s operations. The state government’s promises that no farmers would be forced to leave and that notifications will be revoked offer some short-term respite as the situation progresses, but the larger problem of Waqf property management is still controversial. This event emphasizes how managing cultural assets and property issues involving religious entities need a more open and legally sound approach.