PRATAP KRISHAN REW Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF SHIPPING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are former Naval Seamen Sailors. They have served for periods ranging between a decade and two. Later they were discharged. They sought a continuous discharge certificate. This is essential for them to get fresh engagements in the ships. Their requests were not answered. They have now come to the Court for reliefs. Command the respondents to perform their statutory duty - is the prayer.

(2.) THE defence is based on a policy decision taken by the Seamens Employment Board on 8-3-1983 The resolution reads tem No. 5

(3.) THE Act proclaimed in it Preamble that it is an Act to foster the development and ensure the efficient maintenance of an Indian Mercantile marine in a manner best suited to serve the national interests and for that purpose to establish a National Shipping Board and Shipping Development Fund, for the objects indicated therein are also other objects". It also indicated an other object "to provide for the registration of Indian ships and generally to amend and consolidate the law relating to merchant shipping". , Vessels registered in India and required by the Act to be so registered, apart from the categories covered by Sub-Clause (c) of section 2 are covered by the Act. Sub-clause (9) defines a distressed seaman. Indian Ship is defined under section 2 (18 ). Proper Officer is defined under section 2 (32 ). Registrar means the Registrar referred to in section 24. The definition of "seaman" is particularly important. It is extracted below :---