On January 10, the Supreme Court's constitution bench, led by Justice S.K. Kaul, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice AS Oka, Justice Vikram Nath, and Justice JK Maheshwari, began hearing the Centre's curative petition filed in 2010 seeking additional compensation from Union Carbide, a US-based corporation (now owned by Dow Chemicals). During the hearing, the Court raised questions about the scope of the curative petition, which was filed nearly 19 years after the case was decided. The Apex Court Judges were concerned that the settlement reached between the delinquent Corporation and the Government of India could be reopened on the basis of new documents, especially after such an inordinate delay. Justice Kaul opened the hearing with a query in this regard -“The settlement was arrived at, at a particular point of time. Can we say that 10 years hence, 20 years hence or 30 years hence, open the settlement on the basis of fresh documents?”

Justice Kaul directed the Attorney General to make submissions while the Centre was before the Supreme Court in curative jurisdiction. Mr. Harish Salve, senior advocate for the Union Carbide Corporation, informed the Bench that the Union Government had filed new sets of documents. At this point, Justice Kaul clarified, no documents other than those already on record are to be filed as compilation by the parties. He gently reminded the Union Government that the curative petition should not be treated as a retrial. The Attorney General indicated that the Bench would consider the emerging facts in the case. Without contesting the settlement, he made submissions on the inadequacy of the compensation and the need for it to be amended.

The petition, filed in December 2010, seeks additional compensation of Rs. 7413 crores as well as re-examination of the Supreme Court's order dated 14.02.1989, which set the compensation at US $ 470 million (INR 750 crore). The plea also requests a re-examination of the Court's subsequent orders, which determined the mode of payment and settlement. According to the Union Government, the settlement was based on an incorrect assumption of the total number of deaths, injuries, and losses and did not account for the subsequent environmental degradation. According to the curative petition, the previous figure for deaths was 3,000, and the figure for injury cases was 70,000. However, the actual number of deaths is 5,295 and the number of injuries is 5,27,894.

In September, 2022, when the matter came up for hearing before the Constitution Bench, it had asked the Solicitor General of India, Mr. Tushar Mehta to seek instructions from Centre regarding its present stand on the curative petition filed by it more than a decade ago. Advocate, Ms. Karuna Nundy, representing a group of victims impleaded subsequently, supported the claim of enhancement raised in the curative petition and sought the Court’s permission to substantiate the enhanced claim. However, the Bench thought it fit to await the response of the Union Government. It is pertinent to note that, even then, Justice Kaul had noted that it has to be considered if the compensation can at all be enhanced upon re-determination at such a belated stage.

Case Status: UoI And Ors. v. M/s. Union Carbide Corporation And Ors. 
Citation: Curative Petition (C) No. 345-347/2010
Link: https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2010/60172/60172_2010_2_501_40934_Order_10-Jan-2023.pdf