Delhi: Heritage mosque near PM Modi’s official residence receives eviction notice

The Race Course mosque in Delhi received an eviction notice despite being listed as a heritage property on the New Delhi Municipal Council’s website. The notice says the mosque stands on government land and is “unauthorised.” It directs the mosque authorities to vacate the premises.

The Land and Development Office issued the notice. This office works under the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs and manages government-owned and leasehold properties, especially in Delhi. The order therefore concerns both the mosque’s physical location and the government’s claim over the land.

The authorities were given six days to leave. Mosque representatives also reported that electricity and water had been disconnected. The notice has prompted opposition from Asaduddin Owaisi and Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, who cited the mosque’s heritage status and claimed waqf protection. The article does not report a final resolution.

The eviction notice gave the Race Course mosque authorities six days to vacate the premises. This is the article’s only stated deadline, and it sets a rapid timetable for leaving a religious site that is also listed as a heritage property.

The notice was issued by the Land and Development Office, which operates under the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs. The office manages government-owned and leasehold properties, particularly in Delhi. Its notice described the mosque as standing on government land and being “unauthorised.” Mosque representatives said electricity and water supplies had also been disconnected.

The deadline makes the dispute immediate for worshippers, mosque authorities and supporters seeking legal or administrative intervention. Asaduddin Owaisi asked Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju to intervene, while Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind sought protection for the mosque and adjoining graveyard. The article does not say whether the deadline was extended or enforced.

The government describes the mosque as “unauthorised” because, according to the Ministry of Housing, it stands on government land. The eviction notice therefore rests on the stated status of the land and the government’s authority over it. The article does not provide a further explanation of the alleged unauthorised construction or occupation.

At the same time, the Race Course mosque appears as a heritage property on the New Delhi Municipal Council’s website. A heritage listing records the property’s heritage status, while the eviction notice addresses land control and authorisation. These are different claims about the same place, and the article does not state that heritage listing gives the mosque ownership or permission to remain.

That difference is why the dispute matters. Mosque representatives and Muslim organisations cite heritage records and claimed waqf status, while the government points to government ownership. The article does not report a final legal ruling deciding which claim prevails or how the statuses should be reconciled.

The Land and Development Office is an office under the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs. Its responsibility is to manage government-owned and leasehold properties, particularly in Delhi. That makes it the government body involved in the land-control side of the Race Course mosque dispute.

In this case, the office directed the mosque authorities to vacate within six days. The notice stated that the mosque stands on government land and is “unauthorised.” Representatives of the mosque also said that electricity and water supplies had been disconnected. These actions connect the office’s property-management role to the immediate conditions at the site.

The office’s involvement does not, by itself, settle the competing heritage or waqf claims described in the article. The mosque is listed as a heritage property, and Asaduddin Owaisi said it was a gazetted waqf property since 1977. Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind also asked for intervention to protect the mosque and adjoining graveyard. The article gives no final decision.

A waqf is an endowment under Islamic law dedicated to a religious, educational or charitable cause. The article says each state has a waqf board, a legal entity with power to acquire, hold and transfer property. A mosque or graveyard can therefore be connected to waqf protection when it is recognised or registered as waqf property.

The article also describes “waqf by user.” This means property has been treated as waqf because it has long been used for religious purposes. Asaduddin Owaisi said the Race Course mosque was a “gazetted waqf property” since 1977. He argued that properties registered as waqf in the past remain protected under the amended law.

These claims are central to the dispute because they challenge the eviction’s effect on a religious site. Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind sought protection for the mosque and adjoining graveyard. The article reports the claim of waqf protection, but it does not provide a final legal ruling on it.

If the eviction order is enforced, mosque authorities would have to vacate the premises within six days. That could obstruct worshippers’ access to the Race Course mosque, which is why Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind urged the government to ensure people could offer namaz without obstruction.

The adjoining graveyard could also be affected. The organisation asked Union Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju to protect both the mosque and the graveyard from demolition. Mosque representatives additionally reported that electricity and water had already been disconnected, which could make continued use of the site more difficult even before any physical removal.

The reported consequences remain potential because the article does not say that demolition or final eviction has occurred. Rijiju assured the delegation that he would make every possible effort to address the matter. The dispute may therefore move through government intervention and competing claims over heritage status, waqf protection and government land.

Heritage protection, waqf rights and government ownership address different aspects of a property. A heritage listing records the site’s heritage status. Waqf status concerns an Islamic-law endowment used for religious, educational or charitable purposes. Government ownership concerns who controls the land. These classifications can therefore be asserted at the same time.

The Race Course mosque illustrates the overlap. It is listed as a heritage property on the New Delhi Municipal Council’s website. The Ministry of Housing says it stands on government land and is “unauthorised.” Asaduddin Owaisi says it was a gazetted waqf property since 1977 and is protected as “waqf by user.”

The overlap creates the present dispute. The government’s land office ordered eviction, while mosque supporters rely on heritage records and waqf claims. The article does not explain the final legal hierarchy among these statuses. It reports that Rijiju promised to make every possible effort to address the matter.