Case Note & Summary
The Bombay High Court dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Citizens For A Just Society, a social organization founded by Dr. Usha Mehta, seeking the relocation or shutdown of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) nuclear reactor at Trombay, Mumbai. The petition was filed in the wake of the December 26, 2004 tsunami that devastated parts of southern India and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. The petitioners expressed apprehension about the safety of the nuclear reactor due to a geological fault line running through Thane Creek, which separates Mumbai from Navi Mumbai, and the potential for a tsunami to cause a disaster. The court examined the issue and noted that the respondents, including the Union of India, Atomic Energy Commission, Department of Atomic Energy, BARC, and Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, had placed on record expert opinions and safety assessments indicating that the reactor was designed to withstand natural calamities including earthquakes and tsunamis. The court held that in matters involving high technical expertise, the judiciary must defer to the opinion of experts unless there is clear evidence of arbitrariness or violation of law. The petitioners failed to provide credible scientific evidence to support their claims of imminent danger. The court also applied the precautionary principle but found that the respondents had already taken adequate safety measures. Consequently, the PIL was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Public Interest Litigation - Nuclear Safety - Precautionary Principle - Burden of Proof - The petitioners sought relocation of a nuclear reactor based on public apprehension of tsunami and fault line risks. The court held that in matters of high technical expertise, the court must rely on expert opinion and not substitute its own judgment. The petitioners failed to discharge the burden of proving imminent danger. (Paras 1-10) B) Environmental Law - Precautionary Principle - Application to Nuclear Installations - The precautionary principle requires that where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures. However, the court found that the respondents had already taken adequate safety measures and there was no credible evidence of threat. (Paras 11-15) C) Constitutional Law - Article 226 - Scope of PIL - The court reiterated that in PILs involving complex technical issues, the court should not interfere unless there is clear violation of law or fundamental rights. The court must balance public interest in safety with the need for uninterrupted operation of essential facilities. (Paras 16-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) nuclear reactor at Trombay should be relocated or shut down due to alleged risks from a geological fault line in Thane Creek and potential tsunami threats.
Final Decision
The Bombay High Court dismissed the PIL with no order as to costs, holding that there was no credible scientific evidence of imminent danger to the nuclear installation.
Law Points
- Public Interest Litigation
- Nuclear Safety
- Precautionary Principle
- Burden of Proof in PIL
- Expert Evidence
- Judicial Review of Technical Matters
