By IANS,
New Delhi : The Supreme Court Thursday said any pact the government signs with a nuclear power plant supplier to waive its liability in an accident will be void if it violates the statute.
“If the government enters into an agreement which is contrary to the statute (The Civil Liability For Nuclear Damage Act, 2010), then it would be void,” said an apex court bench of Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan and Justice Dipak Misra.
The court said this while hearing a petition seeking to restrain the Nuclear Power Corp of India Ltd from making operational the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant in Tamil Nadu. The plant was supplied by Russia.
The court’s observation came when a petitioner’s counsel Prashant Bhusan told the court that contrary to the principle of “absolute and strict liability”, as laid down by the apex court, the statute limited the liability to Rs.1,500 crore.
“Even this limited liability of Rs.1,500 crore has been waived off for Russia,” Bhushan told the court.
He was arguing for petitioner G. Sunderrajan, an IT professional.
Bhushan said that if freed from any nuclear liability, the Russians would have a temptation for cost-cutting.
Earlier the Russians were supposed to give seamless nuclear reactor but now they have supplied welded reactors, he alleged.
Bhushan claimed that in the event of a nuclear accident at KNPP, the NPCIL – the operator of the plant – would pay the damages.
Justice Misra said: “By this you are slapping a fiscal liability on the state exchequer.”
“Whether that would have any impact on the national exchequer … we will ask them (attorney general and solicitor general) and they will have to explain”, Justice Misra said.
The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) told the Madras High court that it would not grant any fresh permission for fuel loading till the 17 safety measure, as suggested by a task force, were implemented.
The task force was set up after the Fukushima n-disaster in Japan in 2011 to review the safety of Indian n-plants and suggest measures to ensure their safety, Bhushan told the court.
The high court was told that these 17 measures would be implemented by November but now the NPCIL was saying that it would take six months to two years.
Bhushan said the mere fact that both the task force and the AERB said that the 17 safety measures had to be implemented indicated that they were necessary.
The court was told that the environment clearance given to KNPP in 1989 was vague and had lapsed within five year.
Bhushan said that the government’s decision to retain the spent fuel rods at the plant for seven year also needed an environment impact assessment.
The court would next hear the case Oct 11.