Madras High Court Rules Environmental Clearance Not Required for Essentiality Certificate of Medical Institutions

 Madras High Court Rules Environmental Clearance Not Required for Essentiality Certificate of Medical Institutions

The Madras High Court has held that an Environmental Clearance Certificate and approval from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board are not mandatory prerequisites for obtaining an Essentiality Certificate for establishing a medical institution, clarifying that such environmental compliances, while required under separate statutes for construction and commissioning, do not form part of the qualifying criteria under Form 2 of the Establishment of Medical College Regulations, 1999.

Courts & Judiciary

Hydar Choudhury

Sep 9, 2026·

The Madras High Court recently held that an Environmental Clearance Certificate and approval from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board are not necessary documents for obtaining an Essentiality Certificate for establishing a medical institution. The bench comprising Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan passed this order while hearing a writ petition filed by Chettinad Academy of Research and Education against a communication from the Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, which had insisted on the production of these two certificates before processing the Essentiality Certificate application.

Background of the Case

Chettinad Academy had acquired the property previously owned by Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science and Technology (PRIST Trust) through an e-auction conducted under the SARFAESI Act. PRIST Trust had been granted an Essentiality Certificate in August 2014 for setting up a medical college with an annual intake of 150 students. Although the college operated for a few years, it was denied recognition by the Medical Council of India for the academic years 2017-18 and 2018-19 due to non-compliance with prescribed norms, following which it ceased operations.

Courts & Judiciary

After acquiring the property, Chettinad Academy approached the National Medical Commission seeking permission to admit 150 students for the academic year 2025-26. In response, the State Health Department required the institution to obtain an Environmental Clearance Certificate and a certificate from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board as preconditions for granting the Essentiality Certificate. This requirement was challenged before the Single Judge, who dismissed the plea and directed the institute to secure the said certificates. Aggrieved by this order, Chettinad Academy filed an appeal before the Division Bench of the Madras High Court.

Arguments Advanced by the Parties

The petitioner contended that the Essentiality Certificate originally issued to PRIST Trust had neither been withdrawn nor cancelled, and that under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, all statutory approvals attached to an asset are transferred to the auction purchaser. Accordingly, the Essentiality Certificate continued to remain valid and enforceable. Furthermore, it was argued that neither environmental clearance nor Pollution Control Board approval finds mention in Form 2 of the Establishment of Medical College Regulations, 1999, which outlines the criteria for evaluating an application for an Essentiality Certificate. Therefore, these documents could not be made a prerequisite for its grant.

The State, in its counter, maintained that the Essentiality Certificate is not a mere formality and that the State’s satisfaction in granting it cannot be divorced from broader statutory compliances, including environmental norms. It argued that ensuring environmental safeguards is integral to the establishment of any institution, particularly one involving public health and safety.

Court’s Observations and Reasoning

The Division Bench noted that while the Single Judge had acknowledged the arguments raised by both the petitioner and the State, it had not weighed them against each other or arrived at a conclusive finding on the core issue. The High Court observed that this failure to address the substantive grounds raised by the parties rendered the Single Judge’s order unsustainable.

On the merits, the Court clarified that although Environmental Clearance Certificates and Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board approvals are mandatory under distinct environmental statutes before constructing or commissioning a medical institution, they are not prescribed as qualifying criteria in Form 2 for the evaluation of an Essentiality Certificate. The Bench emphasized that the absence of such environmental clearances at the threshold stage cannot be used by the State as a ground to withhold or delay the processing of an Essentiality Certificate application.

The Court further stated: “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.”

Operative Outcome

The Madras High Court allowed the appeal filed by Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, quashed the order of the Single Judge, and directed the State Health Department to process the Essentiality Certificate application without insisting on the prior production of an Environmental Clearance Certificate or a certificate from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board. The Court made it clear that while such environmental clearances remain obligatory under environmental laws for actual construction and operation, they are not conditions precedent for the grant of an Essentiality Certificate.

Courts & Judiciary

Foreigner cannot claim electoral rights reserved for citizens, says HC

Foreigner cannot claim electoral rights reserved for citizens, says HC

Citizenship is not merely a formal entry in a document; It forms the legal bond from which political rights and civic obligations arose, says Madurai Bench of Madras High Court

B.Tilak Chandar

MADURAI. 07.09.2026

A foreign national cannot claim electoral rights reserved by law for citizens merely because his/her name has erroneously or otherwise continued to remain in an electoral roll, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has said. The court was hearing a petition filed by Jeya Ananthan, who was born in Kuttam in Tirunelveli district in 1986.

He was an Indian citizen by birth. His father was doing business in Colombo, Sri Lanka. In 2003, his father fell ill and was unable to manage the business by himself.

The petitioner proceeded to Colombo to assist him. In 2005, the petitioner’s father entrusted the business to the petitioner and returned to India, and died in 2014. The petitioner participated in his father’s final rites. He got married in 2018 and now resides in Colombo with his wife and son, and has acquired Sri Lankan citizenship.

In April 2026, the petitioner came to India along with his wife and son to attend to his mother who underwent a surgical procedure. Then, he found that his name continued to be in the electoral roll. He cast his vote in the Tamil Nadu Assembly election. A criminal case was registered against him. During the course of investigation, his passport, Overseas Citizen of India card and mobile phone were seized. The articles were subsequently returned to him, subject to the condition that he should appear before the competent authority as and when required. The petitioner filed the petition seeking a direction to the authorities to permit him to travel to Colombo.

Justice L. Victoria Gowri said a person claiming Sri Lankan citizenship exercised his voting right in an election here and thereafter sought a direction permitting him to leave India.

The freedom to travel abroad was an important facet of personal liberty. Nevertheless, such freedom was not absolute and might be regulated by a procedure established by law, particularly when the person concerned was facing a criminal investigation, the court said.

Elections constitute the institutional expression of the sovereignty of the people. The sanctity of an electoral roll and the lawful exercise of the franchise are indispensable to the legitimacy of representative government. A foreign national could not claim electoral rights reserved for citizens merely because his/her name continued to remain in the electoral roll, the court said.

Citizenship was not merely a formal entry in a document. It formed the legal bond from which political rights and civic obligations arose. Franchise was among the most solemn of those political rights. Its exercise by a person not qualified under law warranted a fair and effective investigation. At the same time, the investigation must proceed within the bounds of law, respecting the petitioner’s presumption of innocence and personal liberty, the court said and dismissed the petition.

HC junks govt plea against increment order to disabled govt employee

HC junks govt plea against increment order to disabled govt employee

Siddharth Pandey & Ashutosh Shuklatnn 04.09.2026

Jabalpur/Bhopal: A division bench of Madhya Pradesh high court refused to interfere with a single-judge bench order, directing the state to grant an increment due to a specially abled govt employee, regardless of her failing to clear a typing test. 

The order came on a writ petition filed by the govt, challenging the single-bench ruling on the contention that the grant of increment in this case may set a precedent for other employees to demand a similar raise in pay without having the requisite qualification. 

Dismissing the state’s contention, the division bench of Justice Vivek Rusia, the acting Chief Justice, and Justice Pavan Kumar Dwivedi, in its August 21 order, said the apprehension of the grant of increment setting an unhealthy precedent was ‘absolutely baseless’, as the case of petitioner Sanju Yadav and 24 more specially abled employees was reconsidered by the govt through an order on April 15, 1999, as a special case for granting compassionate appointment, relaxing all conditions. “Once such sensitivity and compassion was shown at the time of appointment, it is highly improbable on the part of the state government to deny the benefit of increment on account of not passing the typing examination,” the bench ruled. 

The judges noted that the petitioner was ‘highly qualified’, possessing an MSc degree (first division) and a BEd degree from Jiwaji University, adding that with the passage of time, the govt itself has done away with the requirement of passing a typing test, as typewriters have come to be replaced by computers. “We find no merit in the present writ appeal. The same is, accordingly, dismissed,” the bench ruled, junking the plea.

Refusal to leave ailing mom not cruelty: HC

Refusal to leave ailing mom not cruelty: HC 

Partha.Behera@timesofindia.com 02.09.2026

Raipur: A husband’s refusal to move away from his old and ailing mother cannot, by itself, be treated as cruelty towards his wife, Chhattisgarh HC ruled Monday, observing that marriage does not extinguish a person’s responsibilities towards parents. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi allowed an appeal filed by a man seeking a divorce from his wife, set aside the trial court’s order dismissing his divorce petition, and dissolved the marriage. The HC noted the wife’s insistence that her husband shift to a different house and held that the demand for a separate matrimonial home could not invariably be characterised as cruelty, as a spouse may have legitimate reasons for seeking independent accommodation. What had to be examined was whether such insistence was justified in the circumstances or amounted to an unreasonable attempt to compel the husband to sever or alter his relationship with his parents, the court observed. In this case, the husband’s mother was “very old and ailing”. The husband’s contention that he was unwilling to distance himself from his mother was “neither unnatural nor unreasonable”, the HC noted. Instead, it reflected a legitimate familial obligation that he was entitled to consider while deciding where to live. The HC further stressed that a matrimonial relationship did not give either spouse an unfettered right to compel the other to renounce or abandon pre-existing familial responsibilities. “Marriage creates a new family, but it does not, by itself, extinguish the moral and legal responsibilities which a person may owe towards aged or infirm parents,” the court stated.

Maternity leave can’t cost job or promotion on return, says HC

Maternity leave can’t cost job or promotion on return, says HC

Abhinav.Garg@timesofindia.com 02.09.2026

New Delhi: Noting that maternity leave can’t cost a woman her job or promotion on return, Delhi High Court has held that statutory protection extends to her duties, functional status, reporting hierarchy, supervisory responsibilities and prospects of appraisal. 

Granting over Rs 10 lakh as compensation to a chartered accountant who was subjected to professional disadvantage on disclosing her pregnancy and returning from maternity leave, the court stressed that protection to women in such cases can’t be reduced to merely retaining their salary and designation. Justice Sachin Datta said Monday that a woman returning from maternity leave is entitled to be restored to the post she held immediately before going on leave. 

“Motherhood cannot be permitted to become a basis for unequal treatment or professional disadvantage,” it said. “Where a woman employee is placed at a disadvantage, deprived of professional growth, denied promotion, stripped of responsibilities, or otherwise subjected to adverse employment consequences solely on account of pregnancy or maternity leave, the resulting action is not merely contrary to the spirit of Maternity Benefit Act but is also manifestly arbitrary and offensive to the guarantee of equality under Article 14.” 

It stressed that permitting an employer to maintain an employee’s salary and designation while stripping her of meaningful responsibilities, authority or career prospects would allow the employer to achieve indirectly what the law prohibits directly. The petitioner said she had around 14 years of professional experience and was appointed as manager, accounting, when she proceeded on leave in Dec 2023. 

On her return in July 2024, she was told that her original position was no longer available and allotted substantially inferior work. The employer claimed that her designation, level, salary and seniority remained unchanged and she was assigned investment accounting and currency revaluation functions at the same managerial level following organisational restructuring. HC stressed that protections under Maternity Benefit Act and Code on Social Security, 2020, stem from constitutional guarantees even against a private employer. It also asked Centre to  frame rules or schemes, or issue directions, for effective implementation of maternity protections.

Can’t recover excess salary from retd Class III, IV staff: HC Bhopal/Jabalpur:

Can’t recover excess salary from retd Class III, IV staff: HC Bhopal/Jabalpur:

02.09.2026

Recovery of excess salary payments from retired Class III and Class IV govt employees is illegal, Madhya Pradesh HC has held while dismissing a revision petition filed by the state govt against a 2025 order. The case relates to Ramrao Bhimte, who joined the police force as a constable in 1991 and retired as a sub-inspector after 36 years of service. 

In 2024, seven years after his retirement, the Bhopal DIG ordered the recovery of Rs 10,87,192 from his pension on the grounds of “erroneous payment of ad hoc increase in the salary during his service period”. The division bench of acting Chief Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal, in its Aug 25 order, referred to a 2015 SC judgement in which the apex court had held that there should be no recovery from Grade C and Grade D employees after retirement. tnn

Can’t deny compassionate job to younger son if elder brother is ineligible: HC

Can’t deny compassionate job to younger son if elder brother is ineligible: HC

Siddharth Pandey & Ashutosh Shukla tnn 

Jabalpur/Bhopal: Denying a job to a person on compassionate grounds just because his elder sibling was found ineligible for it is illogical, a division bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled, upholding a single bench order asking MP Discom to consider the application for compassionate appointment by the younger son of an assistant lineman who died during his service tenure in 2016. 

The single bench had directed MP Discom to grant the application in line with the policy for compassionate employment as it existed then. The company moved the division bench challenging single bench order on the plea. At a hearing on its petition on Aug 20, the division bench directed MP Discom not to reject the plea of the younger son of the departed employee, as it had done in his elder brother’s case. The company had turned down the latter’s application for employment on compassionate grounds, saying he wasn’t qualified enough to be considered for a Class IV job. The bench of acting Chief Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal said, 

“The earlier rejection of the application submitted by the respondent’s elder brother, by itself, cannot be a ground to reject the respondent’s claim, particularly when the respondent is seeking consideration as another eligible dependent of the same deceased employee and the family seeks only one compassionate appointment.”

Issue circular on duties of doctors acting as witnesses: HC

Issue circular on duties of doctors acting as witnesses: HC

The medical professionals appearing as expert witnesses must exercise a high degree of care, said the court.

The Hindu Bureau

MADURAI. 20.08.2026

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Wednesday directed the Health Secretary and the Director of Medical Education and Research to issue a circular/guidelines comprehensively dealing with duties and responsibilities of government medical professionals while acting as expert witnesses before courts.

Justice B. Pugalendhi said the privilege of assisting the court carried with it a corresponding responsibility to provide objective, accurate and consistent testimony. Even an inadvertent lapse by the medical expert while testifying created confusion, prolonged judicial proceedings and affected the rights of either the victim or the accused.

Therefore, the medical professionals appearing before courts as expert witnesses must exercise a high degree of care. Equally important was the duty to carefully read and verify the deposition before affixing their signature, the court said.

The duty to assist the court was an integral part of their professional obligations. It was not a matter of discretion or favour, but a statutory and professional duty, it said.

The court directed that the comprehensive circular/guidelines be issued to all government medical colleges, government hospitals, district headquarters hospitals, primary health centres and other government health care institutions.

It said the instructions should include the ethical standards expected of every expert witness.

It was necessary to ensure that Accident Registers, Wound Certificates, Medico-Legal Reports and all other medico-legal records accurately recorded the clinical findings and professional opinion formed at the time of examination in a legible and unambiguous manner.

Such records might be generated in a typed or computer-generated format for easy comprehension by investigating agencies, prosecutors, defence counsel and courts.

There was a necessity to prepare revised proforma for Medico-Legal Examination of Survivors/ Victims of Sexual Violence, issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, in cases involving sexual violence, including POCSO Act cases. The medical professionals should familiarise themselves with relevant medical records before entering witness box and depose.

The court stressed the need to understand every question during examination and cross-examination; to seek clarification before answering if there was ambiguity; to carefully read and verify the deposition before signing it; and to immediately bring to the notice of the court any omission or inadvertent error noticed therein.

The efficacy of the justice delivery system depended, to a considerable extent, upon the credibility of expert evidence. It was, therefore, imperative that every medical professional entrusted with this responsibility discharged it with the highest standards of competence, objectivity and professional integrity, the court said.

HC: RTI can’t be used for obtaining personal info

HC: RTI can’t be used for obtaining personal info

 TIMES NEWS NETWORK 13.06.2026

Bengaluru : The Right to Information (RTI) Act cannot be employed as a mechanism for obtaining personal information merely for advancing a private claim, the high court has ruled. Justice Suraj Govindaraj made the observation in a recent judgment while dismissing a petition filed by Bengaluru resident S Savithramma. 

She moved Karnataka Information Commission (KIC) for details of the assets and liabilities of SP Jayapal, who worked as deputy controller at the central KSRTC office during 1990-2002, saying he fraudulently obtained a sale deed from her, and she required the documents for pending civil suits. 

On May 6, 2025, KIC rejected her application, citing the information sought by her fell under personal category and could not be disclosed as it was exempted under RTI Act.

 Challenging the order, Savithramma approached high court, arguing that Jayapal is a public servant and, therefore, any immovable property acquired by him, together with the corresponding disclosure of assets and liabilities, should be revealed. 

Justice Govindaraj, however, rejected the argument. “The right to privacy is now recognised as a constitutionally protected right. Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act represents a statutory manifestation of that protection in the context of access to information. Therefore, before directing disclosure of personal information, the authority must be satisfied that public interest sought to be served is of such magnitude as to outweigh privacy interests of the individual. No such circumstances have been shown in the case,” he noted.

HC: Administrative delay cannot defeat employee rights

HC: Administrative delay cannot defeat employee rights

Sureshkumar.K@timesofindia.com 18.02.2026

Chennai : Madras high court made it clear that administrative delay by a municipal corporation or govt cannot defeat employee rights and, similarly, subsequent GOs cannot nullify earlier accrued rights. Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy made the observation while allowing a plea moved by 35 employees of the Greater Chennai Corporation (GCC) who were recruited on a temporary basis as malaria assistants, tax assistants, office assistants, junior assistants, storm water drain workers, and road workers. 

In 1999, the govt brought in a scheme through a GO dated May 27, under which employees who were working as of May 4, 1999, were declared eligible for regularization. As per the scheme, they were appointed in entry-level regular posts and paid a consolidated salary of ₹2,000 per month for one year. They would be brought under a regular time scale of pay after one year and regularised after completion of that one-year period. Thus, as per the scheme, the employees were eligible for regularization by May 27, 2000. However, the scheme was not implemented immediately; instead, the govt issued a GO dated Feb 23, 2006, regularising the employees only from 2006. Aggrieved, the employees moved the court. 

Opposing the plea, the govt contended that an employee appointed temporarily cannot claim regularization from an earlier date as a matter of right. Refusing to concur, the court held that, through the 1999 GO, the govt granted entitlement to regularisation after one year. Through the GO, employees in service as of May 4, 1999, acquired the right to regularization, the court said.

The court made the findings based on the orders passed by a full bench of the court in S Dhanasekaran Vs Govt of Tamil Nadu. Since the order was under appeal before the Supreme Court, the judge directed the GCC to absorb the employees with effect from 2000, subject to the final outcome of the appeal pending before the SC.

Physiotherapists entitled to use ‘Dr’ prefix: Kerala HC

Physiotherapists entitled to use ‘Dr’ prefix: Kerala HC 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 28.01.2026

Kochi : The Kerala high court has ruled that not only medical professionals, but physiotherapists and occupational therapists, too, are entitled to use the prefix ‘Dr’ with their names.

Dismissing a bunch of petitions filed by the state chapter of Indian Medical Association and others, which had challenged the use of the prefix by physiotherapists and occupational therapists, Justice V G Arun said there was no legal bar on such professionals prefixing ‘Dr’ to their name. The petitioners contended that while specialist medical professionals in the field of physical medicine and rehabilitation are qualified doctors, physiotherapists and occupational therapists merely provide supportive services. They argued that such professionals do not possess the qualification to function as first-contact healthcare providers, and that their qualifications, at best, enable them to administer physiotherapy under the instructions of a qualified medical practitioner. 

The petitioners also challenged the Competency-Based Curriculum for Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy, which permits the use of the prefix ‘Dr’ with the suffix ‘PT’/‘OT’, contending that this equates them with modern medical practitioners. 

The HC, however, noted that the term ‘doctor’ originates from the Latin word doctor, meaning teacher or instructor, and that neither the National Medical Commission (NMC) Act nor allied statutes provide for the exclusive use of the prefix ‘Dr’ by qualified medical professionals. 

In the absence of such statutory provisions, the petitioners could not claim an exclusive right to use the prefix ‘Dr’, the bench said.

Madras HC says heirs of temporary staff not eligible for compassionate jobs It observed that the scheme of compassionate appointment is a special scheme and not a constitutional scheme.

Madras HC says heirs of temporary staff not eligible for compassionate jobs It observed that the scheme of compassionate appointment is a special scheme and not a constitutional scheme.

Madras High Court 

Express News Service Updated on:  14 Dec 2025, 9:11 am 

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has set aside an order of the central administrative tribunal (CAT) which had ordered the Southern Railway to pass appropriate orders on the application of the legal heir of a deceased temporary worker for a job under compassionate grounds.

A division bench of justice SM Subramaniam and C Kumarappan held that the scheme of the Union government for compassionate appointments does not provide for appointment to the legal heir of a temporary worker.

It allowed the appeal filed by the Southern Railway challenging the April 21, 2022 order of the CAT passed on the petition filed by D Marimuthu, whose father, a casual labourer, died on harness, seeking appointment on compassionate grounds.

The bench noted Clause 2 (B) Note-II of the scheme of Central government for compassionate appointments defines the eligibility of only the legal heir of “Government Servant” appointed on regular basis and not those working on daily wages.

Advertisement “The scheme itself is not applicable to casual labourers, therefore, the CAT cannot expand the scope of the scheme so as to provide a government job which is in violation of the constitutional principles and would infringe the rights of numerous eligible meritorious candidates, who are all longing to secure public employment by participating in open competitive process,” the bench said in the order.

It observed that the scheme of compassionate appointment is a special scheme and not a constitutional scheme. Such appointment is a concession and can never be claimed as an absolute right.

Marimuthu’s father joined the Southern Railway as a casual labourer on April 11, 1973 and his temporary status was confirmed on October 1, 1974.

He died on October 20, 1987. After a lapse of 16 years, he applied for compassionate appointment. It was rejected on the ground that the legal heirs of casual labourers are not eligible. He approached the CAT which directed Southern Railway to consider it; again, the application was rejected. He filed another petition and the CAT passed the order to check the family conditions and decide on the application. This order was challenged in the high court.

UGC’s anti-ragging system has utterly failed: Delhi HC

UGC’s anti-ragging system has utterly failed: Delhi HC

13.07.2025

Court mulls suo motu PIL petition to check surge in ragging episodes and student suicides; UGC’s anti-ragging helpline number recorded 1,084 complaints in 2024, the highest in past nine years 

SOIBAM ROCKY SINGH 13.07.2025

NEW DELHI In a strong rebuke to the University Grants Commission’s current anti-ragging framework, the Delhi High Court has signalled that it may initiate a suo motu public interest litigation (PIL) petition to address the recent surge in ragging incidents and student suicides across higher educational institutions.

According to the latest 2022 National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) report, students accounted for 7.6% — or 13,044 — of all suicide deaths in India, surpassing even the combined toll among farmers and agricultural labourers. Last year, the UGC’s anti-ragging helpline recorded 1,084 complaints, the highest in the past nine years.

“This system has utterly failed. You have not been able to do anything. Except every other day, there is a news report of a student death,” a Bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed on Friday during the hearing on a petition filed by the Aman Satya Kachroo Trust (ASKT), a non-governmental organisation.

Questioning the effectiveness of the UGC’s anti-ragging system, the court observed, “Spending ₹44 lakh yearly for overseeing the welfare of 35 million students across the country — how do you justify this? You have to open your coffers.”

“This issue of ragging appears to be very superficial, but, if you ever met someone who have dropped out on account of ragging, only then you would realise. A person who commits suicide, we are never able to interact with,” the court had earlier remarked.

Supreme Court rap

The development comes just months after the Supreme Court, in March, expressed concern that the existing UGC regulations on curbing ragging remained largely on paper.

“...news reports have pointed out that tangible actions have not been taken by stakeholders other than mere formalities such as mandating undertakings from students and parents against indulging in ragging, and putting up no-ragging notices on university premises,” the Supreme Court had observed while ordering the registration of an FIR in the case of two students who ended their lives inside the campus of the IIT, Delhi, in 2023. It also directed the formation of a National Task Force to address mental health concerns among students.

Mental health crisis

A 2024 National Medical Commission survey of 37,000 postgraduate students revealed that 31% had suicidal thoughts, and 4.4% had attempted suicide within a year. Over 27% of postgraduates reported being ragged; 31% experienced abuse from faculty or seniors.

HC stays 10 new TN laws on vicechancellor appointments

HC stays 10 new TN laws on vicechancellor appointments 

State Opposes Interim Orders On PIL

By Advocate Sureshkumar.K@timesofindia.com 22.05.2025

Chennai : The operation of Tamil Nadu’s 10 state university laws, the passage of which by Supreme Court triggered a rare presidential reference plus a renewed Centre-state power tussle, was on Wednesday stayed by a vacation court of Madras high court. The bench of Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayanan passed the interim orders amid objections made by Tamil Nadu advocategeneral P S Raman and senior advocate P Wilson, both representing the state. The public interest writ petition filed by advocate K Venkatachalapathy of Tirunelveli assailed the laws saying they were contrary to the objectives of regulations and functions of the University Grants Commission (UGC). “Through Regulation 7.3 of the UGC Regulations for teaching staff, the commission granted power to the Chancellor (governor) to appoint the VCs. However, the state, through the amendments, replaced the power of the Chancellor with the govt, which is contrary to the process stipulated for appointing the VCs,” he said. “The state universities are recognised as universities within Section 2 (f) of the UGC Act and are also recognised by the commission under the applicable regulations. Therefore, any amendments made by the state affecting such universities, especially in areas already covered by the regulation concerning the appointment of VCs, constitute a violation of the constitutional distribution of powers,” he said. 

As announced by chief minister M K Stalin a few days ago, the Tamil Nadu govt moved Supreme Court seeking immediate release of ₹2,151 crore by the Union govt under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme, reports Sureshkumar K . The state accused the Union govt of coercive federal overreach by linking the disbursal of funds to TN’s acceptance of National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the PM SHRI Schools scheme. Tamil Nadu wanted Supreme Court to order the recovery of ₹2,291 crore within a time frame to be fixed by the court, together with future interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the principal sum of ₹2,151 crore. The non-release of funds would affect as many as 43,94,906 students, 2,21,817 teachers and 32,701 staff members, Tamil Nadu said. 

‘Education should be in hands of authority above politics’ Senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, representing the petitioner, contended on Wednesday that universities must be protected from political powers. The chancellor is apolitical like a Speaker of an assembly, and, therefore, education should be in the hands of an authority above politics, he submitted. 

In response, advocate general Raman said, “a legislation passed by a state Assembly can be stayed only when there is glaring unconstitutionality or if it is manifestly arbitrary. In the present case, a state legislation prevails over the regulations framed by the UGC.” So long as it does not contravene a law legislated by Parliament, the state law prevails, he said. 

The amendments got indirect assent from the governor due to the interference of the Supreme Court. The stand of the state is that the UGC does not have the power to constitute a search committee to appoint vice chancellors, Raman added. Wilson sought adjournment saying a petition to transfer of all the related cases to the Supreme Court was pending in the apex court and that arguing the matter now before the high court would leave the pending pleas infructuous. Asserting that there was no urgency to hear the PIL in a vacation sitting, both requested the court to adjourn the hearing and provide time for the state to file its counter. However, refusing any adjournment, the bench heard the petition until 7pm on  Wednesday and passed the interim order. In his submissions, Wilson said the governor was waging a war against the state govt. “The PIL is politically motivated. Except for a grudge to stay the selection process, there is no urgency in the issue,” he said. “Only the process for the appointment of vice-chancellors has commenced. The last date to receive applications is only on June 5. There is no urgency; the apprehension of the petitioner that something will happen tomorrow is unfounded,” the AG said. Wilson said the petitioner, a BJP district secretary from Tirunelveli, chose to move this particular second vacation court, and added: “This is forum shopping. It will be judicial impropriety if the petitioner is allowed to argue,” Wilson said.

Deemed or doomed? HC pulls up Centre, UGC on T varsities Sagar Kumar Mutha

Deemed or doomed? HC pulls up Centre, UGC on T varsities Sagar Kumar Mutha

Mar 18, 2025, 0:23 IST

Deemed or doomed? HC pulls up Centre, UGC on T varsities

Hyderabad: The Telangana high court on Monday issued notices to the central government's higher education department and the University Grants Commission (UGC) asking them to explain their stand within two weeks on the contentions raised by Telangana over the alleged usurping of the state's powers in matters of higher education and in allowing deemed universities to come up in Telangana without the state's approval. 

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara was hearing a writ petition filed by the education secretary and also the commissioner of technical education and collegiate education who challenged the 2023 regulations of the UGC that eliminated the role of the state in matters of issuing essentiality certificates for such deemed universities. 

Advocate General A Sudarshan Reddy said that some of these colleges "which look like mulgis (small shops)" were emerging as deemed universities on one hand and, as if this were not enough, these deemed varsities were setting up off-campus centres everywhere in an indiscriminate manner. 

"The latest regulations allow nondescript colleges to apply for deemed status, and if the essentiality certificate does not arrive within 60 days, these colleges will automatically get deemed university status," he said. 

What happens to the students if these deemed universities close shops overnight? It becomes the state's duty to protect the interests of the students. But the state was not allowed to say whether such a university is essential to come up in a particular area, Sudarshan said. 

The bench wondered whether the state counsel was describing these deemed universities as doomed universities and sought to know from the authorities what happens if the state rejects the application within 60 days. 

Though Section 20 of the Education Act thrusts responsibility on the state to scan before allowing the establishment of such colleges, let alone universities, the UGC says there is no need for an NOC from the state, the AG said. 

Citing the case of KL University, which was recently embroiled in allegations of fraud, the AG said the UGC does not take action against such institutions, and that the state was rendered helpless. "Who will monitor the situation in a global city like Hyderabad where the standards of higher education are required to be on a higher pedestal?" the AG asked while urging the court to scrap regulations which he said were inconsistent with the goal of quality education.

These unfair regulations crept into the UGC through amendments in 2010, 2016, 2019 and 2023, he said, requesting the court to stay them as an interim measure to protect the education field and the reputation of Hyderabad. 

The bench sought answers from the UGC and the centre within two weeks.The bench also issued notices to KL University, Aurora Deemed University, Malla Reddy deemed university, Symbiosis, Chaitanya and Vignan deemed universities.

HC allows 8 doctors to appear in pre PG exam despite internship issue

HC allows 8 doctors to appear in pre PG exam despite internship issue 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 03.05.2025

Bhopal : A division bench of the MP high court has allowed eight doctors to appear in the prePG exam despite not completing the three years of internship. They claimed that their internship period was two years when they began their internship in MP after completing their MBBS from China, but it was later extended to three years. They challenged the extension of the internship period, arguing that the rules of the game should not be changed midway. 

The eight doctors in question, including Dr Saurabh Rafguvanshi from Vidisha and Dr Jai Sharma from Ujjain, said they took admission in the MBBS course in China in 2017. They returned home in 2019 following the outbreak of the Corona pandemic and completed their MBBS course online after returning to India. Students who completed MBBS from abroad required one year of internship to get registration as a doctor in MP, but during the Corona period, it was extended to two years. Their internship period would have ended on March 31, 2025, but in November 2024, it was extended to three years. 

Appearing for the doctors, senior counsel Aditya Sanghi said the National Medical Commission extended the internship period for students doing MBBS from Ukraine and the Philippines due to the war in Ukraine, but the MP Medical Council applied it to all students who completed MBBS from abroad. He argued that the extension of the internship period was challenged in the MP High Court. Meanwhile, pre-PG medical exams are due in June and July, and the last date for filling the form for the exam is June The bench of justices Sanjeev Sachdeva and Vinay Saraf, while issuing notices to respondents, asked the MP Medical Council to allow the eight doctors to appear in the pre-PG exam.

Employer Can't Alter Recorded D.O.B. Of Government Employee Beyond Prescribed 5-Year Period From Date Of Initial Appointment : Calcutta HC

Employer Can't Alter Recorded D.O.B. Of Government Employee Beyond 

Prescribed 5-Year Period From Date Of Initial Appointment : Calcutta HC

Namdev Singh

23 Apr 2025 10:53 AM

The Calcutta High Court bench comprising of Aniruddha Roy, J. held that an employer cannot unilaterally alter the recorded date of birth of a government employee beyond the prescribed five-year limitation period from the date of joining.

Background Facts

The petitioner joined her employment in the year 1987 after submission of all the relevant records and documents. The employer issued identity card in favour of the petitioner. The date of issuance was April 8, 2005 which showed that the date of birth of the petitioner was recorded as October 16, 1967, also which was correct as per the petitioner. The employment of the petitioner became permanent in the year 2009. The necessary service book was prepared and maintained by the employer since then. For the first time in 2024 at the time of scrutiny of the service book, the employer found out that the date of birth of the petitioner was to be October 16, 1965 instead of October 16, 1967.

Accordingly, the employer changed the date of birth in the service book to be as October 16, 1965 after obtaining an approval from the DIG of Correctional Services. Aggrieved by it, the petitioner filed a plea to accept her date of birth to be October 16, 1967. The Special I.G. of Correctional Service passed its order dated September 24, 2024, relying upon the Government Memorandum dated January 24, 2012, whereby it was held that the prayer for change in Date of Birth was considered and rejected on the ground of limitation on time period of five years from the date of joining, during which any prayer for change in date of birth of a Govt. employee can be entertained.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the writ petition.

It was submitted by the petitioner that, at the time of appointment the petitioner had disclosed and submitted all the necessary records where upon due scrutiny and verification was held and only then the petitioner was appointed. The petitioner was also made permanent on the basis of such records and the service book was also prepared accordingly.

Referring to the memorandum dated January 24, 2012 issued by the State, it was submitted by the petitioner that the State has provided a time frame for a period of five years from the joining in the Government service, for any correction to be made. It was further stated that the petitioner came to know about the dispute regarding her date of birth from the communication dated January 3, 2024 which was few decades after the joining of service. Therefore, it was contended that the Government Order/Memorandum would not apply. Lastly, it was contended by the petitioner that the reasons rejecting the plea to accept the date of birth of petitioner to be October 16, 1967 were bad in law and should be set aside.

On the other hand, the state in support of its action, submitted a report dated April 2, 2025 issued by the Officer-in Charge, Law Cell, Directorate of Correctional Services, which provided discrepancy regarding the date of birth of the petitioner:

“In the Primary School Leaving Certificate submitted by the Petitioner issued on 16.11.1985 by the Head Master of Akhlakhi Free Primary School, the date of birth of Smt. Sabita Sen Kundu is 16.10.1967.

Another Primary School Leaving Certificate was issued on 12.06.2001 by the Head Master of Akhlakhi Free Primary School wherein the date of birth of the Petitioner is recorded as 16.10.1965.

Another Primary School Leaving Certificate submitted by the petitioner which was issued on 08.09.2020 by the Head Master of Akhlakhi Free Primary School, the date of birth of Sabita Sen Kundu is recorded as 16.10.1967.

In the Police Verification Roll which was verified by the Superintendent of Police during the year 2021, the date of birth of the Petitioner is 16.10.1967.”

It was further submitted by the state that the multiple sets of records were produced by the petitioner and after scrutiny of those records, the authority came to a finding that the recording of date of birth to be as October 16, 1967 should not have been done, as the contrary record showed the same to be October 16, 1965.

Findings of the Court

It was observed by the court that the Government Memorandum dated January 24, 2012, stated that, if anybody seeks correction of recording of date of birth such prayer has to be made within the period of five years from the joining in the Government service. Therefore, it was observed by the court that after decades of joining in the service the petitioner for the first time from the communication dated January 3, 2024, came to know about the dispute with regard to recording the date of birth raised by the employer. Therefore, the employer's action in altering the date of birth beyond the prescribed five-year period from the commencement of service was improper.

It was held by the court that the impugned communication dated September 24, 2024 was bad in law. Therefore, it was set aside and quashed by the court. The respondent and jurisdictional authority was directed by the court to record the Date of Birth of the petitioner as October 16, 1967 wherever it was required to be recorded in the service record of the petitioner. Further it was held by the court that the retirement of the petitioner shall take place on the basis of the Date of Birth being October 16, 1967 and the relevant calculation of terminal benefits should accordingly be done.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition was allowed.

Case Name : Sabita Sen v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case No. : W.P.A. 4656 of 2025

Counsel for the Petitioner : Anirban Bose, Chandrachur Biswas, Satyajit Senapati

Counsel for the Respondents : Jhuma Chakraborty, Munmun Tewary

Man threatens Delhi judge in court after adverse order ‘Accused Also Tried To Throw An Object At Judge’

Man threatens Delhi judge in court after adverse order ‘Accused Also Tried To Throw An Object At Judge’ 

Vineet.Upadhyay@timesofindia.com 22.04.2025

New Delhi : In a shocking incident, a man and his lawyer recently threatened a woman judge inside a courtroom in Delhi after conviction in a six-year-old cheque bounce case. On April 2, a 63-year-old retired govt school teacher lashed out in court after he was convicted by judicial magistrate first class (Negotiable Instruments Act) Shivangi Mangla for an offence punishable under Section 138 (dishonour of cheque) of the Act. The teacher had been directed to furnish bail bonds under Section 437A CrPC on the next date of hearing, April 5. 

The judge said in her order that the man, besides issuing a threat, also attempted to hurl an object at her for not ruling in his favour. “After hearing the judgement not in favour of the accused, the accused erupted with anger on the judge in open court as to how the judgment of conviction could be passed. The accused started harassing the judge in open court in unofficial Hindi language with commentary against the mother of the judge. The accused was also holding some object and he tried to throw it at the judge… Then, he ordered his advocate to do anything to get the judgment in his favour,” the judge observed in her order. 

She said the accused and his counsel harassed her both mentally and physically, pressuring her to resign from her post and “acquit the accused, (saying) else they will file a complaint against me and forcibly arrange my resignation,” the judge said. The judge said in the order that she would be taking appropriate measures against the accused before National Commission for Women. She also issued a showcause notice to the convict's lawyer, advocate Atul Kumar, asking him to explain why the matter should not be referred to Delhi High Court for criminal contempt proceedings to be initiated against him for misbehaving with her. The convict’s counsel appeared before the court on April 5 and submitted that the convict was a retired govt teacher, surviving on a pension, and he had three dependent sons.

MP High Court Orders Medical College To Return Original Documents Of Student Who Wished To Leave His Seat & Return To Home State

MP High Court Orders Medical College To Return Original Documents Of Student Who Wished To Leave His Seat & Return To Home State

Anukriti Mishra

17 Apr 2025 7:00 PM

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed Government Bundelkhand Medical College in Sagar to return the original documents of a student from Manipur along with No-Objection Certificate who stated that he wants to quit his three-year course in Second year and return to his home state due to unforeseen circumstances therein.

The student had moved the high court after the college had asked him to deposit Rs. 30 Lakh to leave the seat invoking the provision of the Madhya Pradesh Medical Education Admission Rules 2018. The plea challenges the provision of the rules as ultra vires of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. As interim relief the plea sought a direction to the college to give back his original certificates immediately so that he can pursue the next post graduation course in his home state, during the pendency of the plea.

A division bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain while issuing notice on the plea in its order said, “The respondent No.3 is directed to return the original documents along with No Objection Certificate to the petitioner on due acknowledgement and the same shall remain subject to final outcome of the writ petition.”

According to the plea, the petitioner was granted admission in the course of MD (Physiology) in Government Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar (Respondent No.3) in the Sessions 2022-23 from All India Quota as an OBC Category candidate. However, the petitioner has said that he wants to leave the seat for various personal reasons and circumstances and wants to re-appear in NEET (Pre-PG) Examination, 2025.

As per the plea, due to unforeseen circumstances in the State of Manipur which is the home State of the petitioner, the petitioner has to rush to his home State and has to pursue his further studies only in the North-East States of India because of his parents and female members in the family. It is stated that the petitioner had to take a decision to leave the seat in the interest of his family and stay in North-East as he is the only active male member in the entire family.

The petitioner had submitted all his original documents to the college at the time of admission. To pursue his further studies in the North-East, the NOC as well as the original documents are required immediately for admission. The said documents are being denied by Respondent No. 3 on the ground that as per the M.P. Chikitsa Shiksha Praves Niyam, 2018, an amount of Rs. 30 lacs have to be deposited.

Rule 15(1) (Kha) of M.P. Chikitsa Shiksha Praves Niyam, 2018 states that if a person leaves the seat allotted to him then he has to deposit Rs. 30,00,000/- as a seat leaving condition in favour of the college. It is contended that since the petitioner belongs to lower-strata of the society, it is not possible for him to pay such a hefty fee.

It is also contended that the State govt abolished the Rs. 30 lakh penalty rule in 2025 on advice of National Medical Commission.

Therefore, the petition has been filed on the ground that Rule 15(1) (Kha) of M.P. Chikitsa Shiksha Praves Niyam, 2018, in which a demand of Rs.30,00,000/- for leaving the seats of post-graduation by the petitioner is ultra vires to Article 14 (Right to Equality) & 19(1)(g) (Right to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business) of the Constitution of India.

Thus, the petitioner prayed to declare Rule 15(1) (Kha) of M.P. Chikitsa Shiksha Praves Niyam, 2018 as ultra vires to Article 14 & 19(1)(G) of the Constitution of India and to return original documents of the petitioner and grant him No-Objection Certificate.

During the hearing on April 8, the Court directed Government Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar to return the original documents along with No Objection Certificate to the petitioner.

Case Title: Dr. Thongam Yaiphaba Singh Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others, Writ Petition No. 6922 Of 2025

Counsel for Petitioner: Senior Advocate Aditya Sanghi

Counsel for Respondent/State: Advocate Ritwik Parashar