SC to not intervene in Madras HC ruling quashing notice to Isha Foundation

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to intervene in the Madras High Court's 14 December 2022 ruling quashing the show-cause notice issued to the Isha Foundation regarding the construction of its yoga and meditation centre. The court also dismissed an appeal filed by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) challenging the HC ruling.

The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and N.K. Singh, stated, “In our view, there is no case for interfering with the high court’s judgment, particularly in relation to the existing structure of the yoga and meditation centre established by Isha Yoga Foundation. Therefore, no coercive action shall be taken against the foundation regarding the construction of the building.”

The court clarified that its ruling, as well as that of the high court, is based on the specific facts of this case and should not be considered a precedent for legitimising any illegal or unauthorised constructions in the future.

The TNPCB had requested the court to allow an inspection of the premises by the directorate of town and country planning to assess the extent of the construction carried out. Advocate-general P.S. Raman, representing the TNPCB, stated, “If the construction falls within the approved limits, we will have no objection.”

In response, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the foundation, opposed this request, arguing that it would initiate another round of action against the foundation.

The court further noted in its order, “It goes without saying that should there be any need for future expansion, the Foundation must seek prior approval from the competent authority.”

During the previous hearing on 14 February 2024, the Supreme Court expressed concern over the more than two-year delay in filing the appeal, remarking, “When the State approaches us belatedly, it raises suspicions.”

Earlier in the proceedings, Justice Kant asserted that the Tamil Nadu government has the right to ensure that all necessary clearances are in place, highlighting that the state had only mentioned in its plea before the high court that the sewage plant was not operational. He added, “Your show-cause notice is entirely misconceived.”

“Ensure that the sewage plant and all environmental regulations are adhered to. However, you cannot demolish a structure that was erected before your very eyes,” Justice Kant said. “This is not a mere hut; it is a construction spanning several lakhs of square yards.”

The TNPCB had issued the notice on 19 November 2021, alleging that construction at the centre of the Velliangiri hills, Coimbatore, took place between 2006 and 2014 without obtaining the necessary environmental clearance.

The TNPCB's counsel noted that when the construction application was submitted, it seemed that work had yet to commence. “That is why when we granted approval in 2012, we stated it was contingent on receiving environmental clearance. They later claimed they did not require such clearance due to a notification exempting educational institutions,” he explained.

The Tamil Nadu government contested the foundation's assertion that it qualified as an educational institution. In response, Justice Kant questioned, “How can you assert that a yoga centre is not an educational institution? The high court has ruled against you. Let’s assume that ruling was incorrect. What is your justification for waiting two years to come here?”