Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]Code Contextif (Configure::read('debug')) {
trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);
} else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67ecec6673b36-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67ecec6673b36-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67ecec6673b36-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 11104, 'title' => 'We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 15 November, 2011, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2628272.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 11218, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 11104, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'Energy', 'metaDesc' => ' Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 11104, 'title' => 'We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 15 November, 2011, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2628272.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 11218, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 11104 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'Energy' $metaDesc = ' Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: “These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: “The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. “Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design” and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: “the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the ‘polluter pays' principle and the ‘absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.” Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $maxBufferLength = (int) 8192 $file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php' $line = (int) 853 $message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]Code Context$response->getStatusCode(),
($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')
));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67ecec6673b36-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67ecec6673b36-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67ecec6673b36-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 11104, 'title' => 'We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 15 November, 2011, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2628272.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 11218, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 11104, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'Energy', 'metaDesc' => ' Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 11104, 'title' => 'We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 15 November, 2011, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2628272.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 11218, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 11104 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'Energy' $metaDesc = ' Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: “These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: “The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. “Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design” and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: “the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the ‘polluter pays' principle and the ‘absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.” Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $reasonPhrase = 'OK'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]Code Context$value
), $first);
$first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67ecec6673b36-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ecec6673b36-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67ecec6673b36-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67ecec6673b36-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 11104, 'title' => 'We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 15 November, 2011, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2628272.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 11218, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 11104, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'Energy', 'metaDesc' => ' Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 11104, 'title' => 'We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo; </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 15 November, 2011, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2628272.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 11218, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 11104 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can&#039;t go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'Energy' $metaDesc = ' Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: &ldquo;These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: &ldquo;The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.&rdquo;</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. &ldquo;Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design&rdquo; and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: &ldquo;the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the &lsquo;polluter pays' principle and the &lsquo;absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.&rdquo; Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: “These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: “The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. “Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design” and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: “the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the ‘polluter pays' principle and the ‘absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.” Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $cookies = [] $values = [ (int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8' ] $name = 'Content-Type' $first = true $value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
<head>
<link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 11104, 'title' => 'We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: “These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.” </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: “The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.” </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. “Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design” and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition said: “the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the ‘polluter pays' principle and the ‘absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.” Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 15 November, 2011, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2628272.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 11218, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 11104, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'Energy', 'metaDesc' => ' Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: “These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: “The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. “Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design” and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: “the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the ‘polluter pays' principle and the ‘absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.” Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 11104, 'title' => 'We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: “These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.” </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: “The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.” </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. “Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design” and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> The petition said: “the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the ‘polluter pays' principle and the ‘absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.” Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 15 November, 2011, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2628272.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'we-can039t-go-into-safety-of-all-nuclear-plants-cji-by-j-venkatesan-11218', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 11218, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 11104 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'Energy' $metaDesc = ' Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify"><em>Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body</em></div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: “These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: “The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.”</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. “Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design” and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">The petition said: “the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the ‘polluter pays' principle and the ‘absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.” Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'
include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
![]() |
We can't go into safety of all nuclear plants: CJI by J Venkatesan |
Bench says it's not averse to idea of setting up independent regulatory body The Supreme Court on Friday indicated that it would not go into the safety aspects of all nuclear plants in the country and all such concerns could be addressed to respective High Courts. A Bench of Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar, however, said it was not averse to going into the issue of setting up an independent regulatory body to conduct safety reassessment of all existing and proposed nuclear facilities. The Bench was hearing a public interest writ petition, jointly filed by Common Cause; the Centre for Public Interest Litigation; former bureaucrats, including T.S.R. Subramanian; the former Chief Election Commissioner, N. Gopalaswami; and university professors seeking a safety reassessment of all nuclear facilities in the country, and a comprehensive long-term cost-benefit analysis of the plants.When counsel Prashant Bhushan insisted that the court issue notice and examine this petition, the Chief Justice said: “These plants were constructed over the years. Every plant has its structure. The area and the people are also relevant. We are not technical experts or qualified to examine them. We cannot pass across the board norms for all reactors.” When the Chief Justice wanted to know whether representations were made pointing out security concerns, Mr. Bhushan said many letters were written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Department of Atomic Energy, but no action was taken. However, Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati told the Bench: “The petition only annexes 93 letters. The government has not received any representation.” Mr. Bhushan said he would produce the representations made and the letters written to the Prime Minister, and the court granted two weeks for doing so and adjourned the hearing till then. The PIL questioned the constitutional validity of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, which indemnifies nuclear manufacturers/suppliers and caps the financial liability of operators. It also sought a stay on all proposed plants until the safety and cost-benefit analysis was carried out. The March Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had turned out far graver than originally feared. The reactors and overheated spent-fuel pools had spewed out radioactivity that had now spread over hundreds of square kilometres. The petitioners wanted costs and risk factors thoroughly factored in and the highest level of safety ensured before a plant was cleared for commissioning. The petition pointed out that four 700 MWe pressurised heavy water reactors, two at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and two at Kakrapar in Gujarat were under construction. “Two reactors at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu and two reactors in Haripur district of West Bengal are under construction based on Russian design” and the nuclear plant in Tamil Nadu had met extremely stiff opposition from people in the area. The petition said: “the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010, by capping the financial liability of operators and by making suppliers not liable, violates the ‘polluter pays' principle and the ‘absolute liability' principle which have become recognised as part of the law of the land under Article 21 of the Constitution, and puts to grave and imminent risk the right to safety, health, clean environment and life of the people of India guaranteed under Article 21.” Hence the writ petition sought to declare the nuclear law as unconstitutional and void.
|