Raj Kumar Hukku Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Appeal: Civil Appeal No. 6700 of 2002

Petitioner: Raj Kumar Hukku

Respondent: Union of India & Ors.

Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 6700 of 2002

Judges:

Date of Judgment: May 04, 2004

Merchant Shipping Act, 1958
Section 80 (As deleted by Amendment Act, 1986 – Section 5) – Certificate of service under Act of 1958 – Rule 15 of the 1998 Rules and MS. Notice No. 4 of 2001 – If discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 & 19 – Rationale and object of International Convention. Held that keeping in view the object of International Convention, the Rule and M.S. Notice are violative of Articles 14 & 19 of Constitution. Discrimination is based on intelligible differentia.

Rationale behind the signing of the International Convention, of which India is a signatory, is to bring the uniformity of standard internationally. This has become necessary to comply with the STCW 95 requirement to provide evidence of training and competency regarding emergency procedures, occupational safety, medical care, survival functions and radio communications etc. The whole idea behind convening of such Conventions is to attain the uniformity of standard of competence internationally because the ships sail on international water. (Para 16)

Different standards are prescribed for different categories to achieve the competence of par excellence, keeping in view the emergency situation, occupational safety, medical care, survival functions etc. while sailing on sea. (Para 19)

It cannot be denied that the Naval officers who, by virtue of section 80, as it then stood, got certificates of service had never been assessed and were merely given certificates of service without any examinations. The 1995 Convention specifically requires the Director General of Shipping to determine the competency. (Para 21)

The aforesaid notice was issued in conformity with Rules 11 and 15 framed under the Convention. The distinction between CoS and CoC is clearly based on intelligible differentia. Article 14 forbids discrimination but allows reasonable classification based on intelligible differentia. In the present case, the reasonable classification is aimed at to achieve the uniformity of competence internationally. By no stretch of imagination such classification can be termed as discriminatory or violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution. (Para 22)

Ed: On an undertaking being given on behalf of Director General of Shipping, the court directed to make provisions for holders of different categories of Certificate of Service for various ships. Petitions disposed off accordingly. (Para 23)