SC moved against Kudankulam plantSeptember 11th, 2012 - 10:03 pm ICT by IANS
New Delhi, Sep 11 (IANS) A private company’s employee Tuesday moved the Supreme Court against a Madras High Court order giving the green signal to the commissioning of the Kudankulam nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu.
It is not yet known when the petition would come up before the apex court.
Petitioner G. Sundarrajan, working with an IT company, claimed that the high court paved the way for starting the plant without ensuring that critical safety features were in place.
He challenged the Aug 31 verdict of the high court and sought an ex-parte interim order restraining the government from going ahead with the initial fuel loading of Unit I and 2 of the Kundankulam Nuclear Power Project (KNPP) in Tirunelveli district.
- SC moved against Kudankulam plant (Lead) - Sep 11, 2012
- SC refuses to stop fuel loading in Kundankulam plant (Second Lead) - Sep 13, 2012
- SC refuses to stop fuel loading in Kundankulam plant (Lead) - Sep 13, 2012
- Kudankulam project gets Madras High Court's green signal (Lead) - Aug 31, 2012
- SC refuses to stop fuel loading in Kundankulam plant - Sep 13, 2012
- Madras HC seeks details of Kudankulam power project - Aug 21, 2012
- Court frowns on ministers over Kudankulam launch date - Aug 16, 2012
- AERB clears fuel loading in Kudankulam nuclear reactor - Aug 10, 2012
- Petitions against Kudankulam reactors dismissed by Madras High Court - Aug 31, 2012
- Madras High Court reserves order on Kudankulam - Aug 23, 2012
- Madras HC reserves order on Kudankulam petitions - Aug 29, 2012
- Kudankulam safety steps a matter of public interest, says SC - Sep 20, 2012
- Top nuclear officials meet Kudankulam expert panel, protests on - Oct 29, 2011
- Anti-nuclear activists to continue protests at Kudankulam - Aug 11, 2012
- SC moved for staying Kudankulam's 1989 environmental clearance - Sep 21, 2012
Tags: apex, apex court, critical safety, fuel loading, madras high court, New Delhi, nuclear power plant, nuclear power project, petition, petitioner, private company, safety features, sep 11, supreme court