Environmental Clearance, Pollution Control Board Approval Not Mandatory For Essentiality Certificate Of Medical Institution: Madras High Court

It may be noted that an Essentiality Certificate is issued by the State giving its opinion on whether a medical college is needed in a given area.

The bench of Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan held that though the certificate and approval were mandatory before constructing or commissioning a medical institution, they were not part of the qualifying criteria prescribed for obtaining an Essentiality certificate. The court thus held that lack of environmental clearance could not be a ground for the state to withhold the processing of the Essentiality Certificate.

“While environmental compliances (such as the Environmental Clearance Certificate and Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board approval) are mandatory before constructing or commissioning a medical institution under distinct environmental statutes, they are not qualifying criteria prescribed under Form 2 for evaluating the grant of an Essentiality Certificate. The lack of an environmental clearance at the threshold cannot serve as a ground for the State to withhold or defer the processing of an Essentiality Certificate,” the court said.

The court was hearing a petition filed by Chettinad Academy of Research and Education against a letter issued by the Principal Secretary, Health and Family Department, requiring the institution to obtain an Environmental Clearance Certificate and a certificate from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board for granting an Essentiality Certificate.

The institute had purchased the property, which originally belonged to Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science and Technology, [PRIST Trust], by way of an e-auction under the SARFAESI Act. The trust had been granted an Essentiality Certificate in August 2014 for setting up a medical college with an annual intake of 150 students. The college ran for a few years, but was denied recognition for the years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 since the institution did not meet the norms prescribed by the Medical Council of India. Following this, the college stopped functioning.

After Chettinad Academy acquired the property, it applied to the National Medical Commission seeking approval to admit 150 students for the academic year 2025-26. However, it was asked to obtain Environment Clearance Certificate and a certificate from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, which was challenged before the Single Judge.

The institute argued that the Essentiality Certificate issued to PRIST Trust had never been withdrawn or cancelled and since the SARFAESI Act carries all statutory approvals attached to an asset to the auction purchaser, the certificate continued to hold good. It was also argued that an environmental clearance and a pollution control board certificate had nothing to do with the grant of an Essentiality Certificate, since neither was found among the requirements listed in Form 2 of the Establishment of Medical College Regulations, 1999.

The single judge, however, disposed of the plea, directing the institute to obtain the two certificates. This was challenged by the institute. It was argued that the single judge had not dealt with any of the grounds raised by the institute.

The State, on the other hand, argued that the Essentiality Certificate was not a mechanical formality and the State's satisfaction could not be divorced from statutory compliance such as environmental clearance.

After hearing the parties, the court noted that though the single judge had noted the argument of the institute and the state, it did not weigh the stand against each other or arrive at a finding. The court thus noted that the issues raised by the parties were left unanswered, which itself was sufficient to set aside the judgment.

The court also noted that the institute was not seeking exemption from obtaining the environment certificate but was only arguing that the certificate was not a requirement for the Essentiality Certificate. The court found force in the argument and noted that while issuing the Essentiality Certificate, the State was only required to assess local medical manpower deficiencies, doctor-population ratios, public interest/desirability, site feasibility and the availability of adequate clinical material. The court added that the State was not to act arbitrarily or insist upon parameters outside the scope of Form 2 or the governing Parliamentary legislation.

Thus, the court was inclined to set aside the order of the single judge and directed the State to process and consider the application of the institute for granting an essentiality certificate without insisting on the prior production of an Environmental Clearance Certificate or TNPCB approval at this stage.

Counsel for Appellant: Mr. Nithyeash Natraj for Mr. Vaibhav Rangarajan Venkatesh

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. A. Abdul Hameed Additional Advocate General-IV Assisted by Mr. L. Gokulraj Addl Govt Pleader, Ms. Subharanjani Ananth Standing Counsel

Case Title: Chettinad Academy of Research and Education v The State of TN and Others

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 433

Case No: WA No 83 of 2026