Supreme Court Raises Concerns Over Delayed Plea Against Isha Foundation’s Yoga Centre

The Supreme Court recently questioned the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) over its delayed challenge to a Madras High Court order favoring Sadhguru’s Isha Foundation. The case revolves around whether the foundation’s yoga center in Coimbatore’s Velliangiri Hills required environmental clearance for construction between 2006 and 2014.

During the hearing on February 14, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh expressed skepticism about the TNPCB’s two-year delay in appealing the High Court’s December 2022 decision. “What prevented authorities from approaching this Court in time? When the State comes belatedly, we become suspicious,” Justice Surya Kant remarked.

Read Also:- Supreme Court Warns: Casual Use of UP Gangsters Act Violates Civil Liberties

The court emphasized that instead of seeking demolition, the TNPCB should focus on ensuring compliance with environmental safeguards. “Your concern now must be to ensure all environmental parameters are met—sunlight, greenery. Everybody is obligated to comply with that,” Justice Kant added.

The dispute began in 2021 when the TNPCB issued a show-cause notice to Isha Foundation for constructing without mandatory environmental clearance under the 2006 Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification. The foundation argued it had been operating since 1994, predating the rules, and that its yoga center—a hub for “mental and physical development”—qualified as an educational institution.

Read Also:- No Access to Third-Party Passport, Personal ID Details Under RTI, Rules Delhi High Court

A 2014 Central Government clarification exempts educational institutions, industrial sheds, and hostels from prior environmental clearance. The Madras High Court agreed, ruling in 2022 that the yoga center’s role in promoting group activities and education justified the exemption.

The Central Government supported Isha’s exemption, citing a 2022 memorandum defining educational institutions as those fostering “mental, moral, and physical development.” However, the TNPCB contested this, claiming only 10,000 sq. meters of Isha’s 2 lakh sq. meter premises could qualify.

The High Court also noted that a Kerala High Court stay on similar exemptions did not apply in Tamil Nadu. “The interim stay was limited to Kerala’s jurisdiction,” the bench clarified, allowing Isha’s exemption to stand.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Isha, asserted the foundation had all necessary approvals. “Only 20% is constructed; 80% remains green. It’s one of India’s finest centers,” he stated, even offering judges a tour. The TNPCB sought time to submit a revised affidavit, prompting the Supreme Court to adjourn the case.

Case Title: TAMI NADU POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD v. ISHA FOUNDATION, Diary No.57906/2024