A end of life vessel DE MARZ, or 18 DE MARZO (IMO No.7383346)was due to arrive at Colombo, Sri Lanka around 6 June 2012. ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) seeks help to identify the vessel's current location.
The information about this vessel whether it is headed to India or it has arrived be helpful. TWA can write to Mexican authorities to recall the vessel.
06/06/2012
Send dead toxic US ship, Exxon Valdez (now named MV Oriental N) away from Indian waters
To
Hon'ble
Union Environment & Forests Minister
Government of India
New Delhi
Subject-Send dead toxic US ship, Exxon Valdez (now named MV Oriental N) away from Indian waters
Madam,
Pursuant to my letter dated 18/5/2012 to the Hon'ble Prime Minister and a letter dated April 2, 2012 to Union Shipping Minister, I wish to draw your urgent attention in the matter of environmental security concerns from the entry of dead US vessel, MV Oriental N (formerly Exxon Valdez, Oriental Nicety, Exxon Mediterranean, Sea River Mediterranean, S/R Mediterranean, Mediterranean, and Dong Fang Ocean), relevant Supreme Court orders and the need to send this vessel out of Indian waters.
I submit that if the Supreme Court's orders of 3rd May, 11th May and 14th May are read along with the attached two applications, it becomes clearer that the order has banned entry of the dead US ship Exxon Valdez (currently named MV Oriental Nicety) due to its failure to comply with UN's Basel Convention on Transboundary Movement of Hazardous to which India is a party. It has been renamed again as MV Oriental N. All the 3 orders in the Writ Petition (Civil) 657 of 1995 are available on imowatch.blogspot.com (Supreme Court orders of 3rd-11th, & 14th May on Exxon Valdez (MV Oriental Nicety, MV Oriental N) Case )
I submit that it is indeed quite shocking that despite non-compliance of the Basel Convention (& Supreme Court order of 14th October 2003 and 3rd May 2012) the dead US ship is still in Indian waters, off Mumbai. It is attempting to set a bad precedent for hundreds of such ships to be dumped in Indian waters in connivance by US Maritime Administration and some gullible Indian officials. I submit that even in the case of another dead and hazardous US ship, the real owners had taken Indian law enforcement agencies for a ride due to lack of coordination and cooperation between Union Shipping Ministry and Union Environment & Forests Ministry.
I submit that it is a second such ship originally from USA that is outwitting Indian laws. The USA’s regulations and European Union regulations prohibit the entry of such vessels. In an Office Memorandum No.29-3/2009-HSMD, Government of India, Ministry of Environment & Forests, (HSM Division) dated 9th May, 2011, relating to implementation of Supreme Court directions in respect of ship breaking activities, the previous dead and convicted US ship, Platinum II (Ex SS Oceanic, MV Oceanic) was denied beaching permission but it remained in Indian waters without beaching. It had left US waters despite indictment by US Environment Protection Agency with the apparent connivance of MARAD. It had entered Indian waters on fake documents.
I am attaching my application seeking enforcement of Basel Convention, recommendations of Inter-Ministerial Committee on shipbreaking and the Supreme Court orders and the application filed by Best Oasis company, subsidiary of Priya Blue company seeking permission to dismantle the dead and hazardous US ship in Indian waters.
I submit that Basel Convention Technical Guidelines for the Environmentally Sound Management of the Full and Partial Dismantling of Ships was adopted at the sixth meeting of the Conference of the Parties has to be followed. This 112 page guidelines provide information and recommendations on procedures, processes and practices that should be implemented to achieve Environmentally Sound Management at ship dismantling facilities. It identifies different environmental hazards and recommends specific measures to prevent it or reduce them. It also contains a list of wastes that may be inherent in the vessel structure or on board a ship. Finally, the guidelines provide advice on monitoring and verification of environmental performance. For details regarding Basel Convention visit: http://www.basel.int
I submit that is clear from the order that compliance with UN’s on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal which is part of Supreme Court's order dated October 14, 2003 is required. In the order dated May 3, 2012, Supreme Court had asked Union of India, Ministry of Shipping and Ministry of Environment & Forests “to inform this Court as to the steps being taken to prevent the ship berthing in any of the ports in India, without following the conditions indicated in the Basel Convention.”
I submit that strict compliance is required of the CPCB’s 'Environmental Guidelines for Shipbreaking industries' as well It reads: "Old vessels containing or contaminated with substances such as PCBs, waste asbestos dust and fibre, lead and lead compounds are accordingly classified as hazardous materials. The customs authority and /or the concerned State Maritime Board should ensure this and issue a certificate to this effect that the vessel is free from prohibited materials."
I submit that a 2004 report of the Directorate of Naval Intelligence, Union Ministry of Defence records:"some ships arriving at the breaking yards...may be involved in nefarious activities". It noted that a large number of cash buyers are Pakistani nationals based in London and the UAE. "Due to large profit margins, the Dawood group appears to have invested heavily in cash buyers thus having a stake in most deals”. It was recorded in a letter of the Standing Monitoring Committee on Ship breaking, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests in May 2011 that the Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB) and Customs were unable to verify the records of some of the ships. It was suggested that the DG shipping be authorized to first verify records before the ships are allowed to dock at the Alang yards. But the GMB officials said this would be acceptable to them only if the DG shipping was able to carry out such verification within 48 hours or it would presume that the records provided by the ship are authentic. This matter has not been resolved as yet.
I submit that the Minutes of the Supreme Court constituted Inter-ministerial committee (IMC) and a sensitive document of Union Ministry of Defence has been filed in the court that reveal how security concerns that emanate from ship breaking activity have been expressed. The relevant excerpts from the fourteen minutes dated February 5, 2004, June 11, 2004, January 19, 2005, June 28, 2005, February 1, 2006, September 21, 2006, January 1, 2007, August 9, 2007, February 28, 2008, February 4, 2009, October 5, 2009, October 5, 2010,September 17, 2010 , July 8, 2011 and February 28, 2012 are given below.
I submit that the minutes of 14th meeting of February 28, 2012 refers to “Security concerns” but does not reveal what has been the response to the several recommendations of IMC in the earlier meetings. The relevant part of the minutes of its 13th meeting reads: “Security concerns: The representative of Coast Guard brought to the notice of IMC that various foreign made communication equipment like emergency beacons brought on board of the ships and taken to breaking yards are not properly deactivated before dismantling the ships. The Coast Guard expressed concern from security angle as there were a few incidents of false alarms emanating from such equipments….” The issue of “false flag certification” was also raised.
I submit that “It was also clarified by GMB that the requisite information would also be sent to MOD” in the minutes. Subsequent to this the minutes of the 14th meeting does not reveal whether Ministry of Defence has been sent information that was promised.
I wish to draw your attention towards the minutes of the 12th meeting. It reads: “Security Concerns – In the last meeting, it had been decided that the Ministry of Shipping would organize a meeting on security matters with GMB, Naval HQ and Coast Guard HQ, Customs etc. to ensure that issues linked to gaps in the security frame-work are addressed on a priority basis. The representative of Naval HQ informed that they have already taken up the matter with the DG Shipping on 3 September 2009 highlighting the necessary precautionary security steps, including a monthly security meeting to be conducted by the Yard/Port Authority. The representative of the DG Shipping informed that the suggestions of the Naval HQ have been conveyed to the Gujarat Maritime Board.” It is not clear whether the suggestions of the Naval Headquarters have been acted upon.
I submit that the minutes of 11th meeting of IMC reads: “Security Concerns – The Coast Guard representative brought out some security concerns and incidents of communication sets from ships reportedly finding their way to the local fisherman.”
I submit that these concerns cannot be taken lightly. The minutes of the IMC meeting reads: “Security Concerns – Both the representative of the Coast Guard and the representative from Naval HQ raised concerns over the entry of ships carrying hazardous cargo to Alang for ship breaking and how no information is made available to them regarding the movement of ships to Alang. Besides this there was no information regarding whether the Alang Port is compliant with the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code. In the context of the present security concerns in the country, the Chairman advised the representative of the Ministry of Shipping, the GMB officials, the Coast Guard representative and the Naval HQs to address the issue expeditiously so that the security gaps are taken care of and also to verify whether the port at Alang has implemented the ISPS codes.” The entry of dead ships in Indian waters with fake documents reveals that security gaps have not been addressed.
I submit that IMC minutes reads: “Security concerns 16. Representatives of Naval Headquarter pointed out that because of large floating population at Alang it has become a breeding ground for mafia and other anti national elements who are indulging in nefarious activities. He further pointed out that sometimes vessels moving to Alang for breaking do not carry sufficient fuel and may also be not sea worthy. This may cause serious accidents at sea if such vessels are drifting in areas closer to oil field development areas. He therefore requested that there should be strict enforcement of account ability of ships reporting at Alang and the port authorities must share information with intelligence agencies. Further Naval Headquarters should also be informed about war ships and ships with sensitive cargo coming to Alang for ship breaking.” The radioactive wastes laden dead ships and war ships are indeed a matter of huge security concern.
I submit that the minutes of the another IMC meeting reads: “The Coast Guard representative and the Naval HQ representative also expressed apprehensions that the vessels coming in for beaching sometimes ply very close to the oil rigs, which could be a potential for accidents. Though the representative of the DG, Shipping clarified that the ships are to ply on pre-determined chartered routes, it was emphasized that the preventive measures on such matters need to be strengthened and ensure due compliance by all. The Chairman directed that the Ministry of Shipping may organize a meeting on the matter with GMB, Naval HQ and Coast Guard HQ, Custom etc. immediately and ensure that gaps in the security frame-work issues are addressed immediately.” There is a need to examine whether gaps in the security frame-work issues have been addressed as recently as during 2011-12 when 415 dead ships were dumped at Alang beach.
Let me take the opportunity to inform you that the May 3, 2012 order of Justice Altamas Kabir and Justice J. Chelameswar bench of Supreme Court in the matter of a US hazardous dead vessel named 'Oriental Nicety' (formerly Exxon Valdez, Exxon Mediterranean, Sea River Mediterranean, S/R Mediterranean, Mediterranean, and Dong Fang Ocean) that was trying to enter Indian waters at Alang beach Bhavnagar has sought compliance with UN’s Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal to which India is a party. This has vessel has been renamed as MV Oriental N, Gujarat.
I submit that The Washington Post news report, “The many lives of the Exxon Valdez”, March 29, 2012 disclosed that the vessel is on the way to Alang beach. It may be noted that in the year 2000-2001, the buyer of the vessel and the owner of Priya Blue Industries Pvt Ltd, Shri Sanjay P Mehta has been in the ship recycling business as he was engaged with “MARUTI METALS, LLC” in the US as a advisor at the recycling Site at Brownsville, Texas. It was involved in the dismantling of United States Adventure, a US Navy vessel as per the requirements of US Maritime Administration [MARAD] an agency within the US Department of Transportation. After the entrepreneurs of the "MARUTI METALS LLC" decided to close their business in US, Shri Mehta moved to India to further continue his recycling business in Alang-Sosiya, Gujarat India. Its 100% subsidiary, Best Oasis Limited, a newly formed company and a part of "Priya Blue Group" which is a "CASH BUYER" that purchases vessels on "As is Where is basis" to deliver the same for ship dismantling at Alang beach at the convenience of ship owners from developed countries. Hongkong based Best Oasis Limited is a purchaser, seller and financer of end-of-life ships.
I submit that the end-of-life ship 'Oriental Nicety' was purchased in March 2012 by a US based company Global Marketing Systems (GMS), which is one of the biggest, cash buyers for dead ships. It was sold to Best Oasis Company for about $16 million. The Bill of Sale of the ship alone can reveal its true or latent value. This 301 meters long tanker is 50 meters wide, 26 meters depth, weighing 30,000 tons empty and powered by a 23.60 MW diesel engine. US based National Steel and Shipbuilding Company built this tanker for Exxon Mobil Corporation, a US multinational oil and gas corporation and a direct descendant of John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company. It was built in San Diego, California in 1986.
I submit that the GMS was involved in the purchase of controversial radioactive and hazardous waste laden European ship SS Blue Lady (ex-SS Norway, SS France) and was also involved in the Blue Lady case and the dead hazardous US ship Platinum II (ex-MV Oceanic, SS Independence). Platinum II was indicted by US Environmental Protection Agency. This ship was denied beaching permission by Union Ministry of Environment & Forests but the Ministry’s intent was outwitted as the dead ship remained in Indian waters and was illegally scrapped at Gopnath anchorage point in Bhavnagar Gujarat.
In the past 23 years, the dead US vessel MV Oriental N (formerly Exxon Valdez, Oriental Nicety, Exxon Mediterranean, Sea River Mediterranean, S/R Mediterranean, Mediterranean, and Dong Fang Ocean) has been renamed several times. It has worked in at least three areas of the world since it ran aground on Bligh Reef in Alaska's Prince William Sound in March 1989. The 30,000-ton tanker ruptured eight of its 11 oil-storage tanks and spilled nearly 11 million gallons of crude oil into the ecologically rich area. Exxon Mobil spent $30 million to repair the single-hulled ship and moved it to its Mediterranean routes after the US banned the ship from Alaskan waters and a law was passed requiring double hulls on oil tankers.
I submit that the USA which is a non-party to Basel Convention appears to be testing the robustness to the regulatory regime. If a bad precedent is set by allowing this dead US ship, Indian waters will be flooded with hundreds of dead ships both of military and military origin in the aftermath of the lifting of moratorium on transfer of toxic ships to developing countries by US Government.
I submit that a letter to Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism & Culture informing it about a letter of Shri Rajgopal Sharma, Advisor, Indian Embassy, Brussels dated December 20, 2011 wherein it has been revealed that most of the dead and hazardous ships that are currently at Alang beach are in illegal traffic. The letter was based on Shri Sharma’s conversation with Shri Julio Garcia Burgues, Head of the Waste Management Unit, European Commission – DG Environment. This reveals that even EU is trying to transfer its dead ships to India.
In view of the above facts, there is a compelling logic to intervene earnestly to set matters right by sending the dead US ship away from Indian waters.
Thanking You
Yours faithfully
Gopal Krishna
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
New Delhi
PIN. 110016
Phone: +91-11-26517814, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Mb: 9818089660, 08002263335
E-mail:krishna1715@gmail.com
Web: toxicswatch.blogspot.com
Cc
Shri Anand Sharma, Union Minister of Commerce & Industry
Shri G K Vasan, Union Minister of Shipping
Smt Jayanthi Natrajan, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Shri Jyotiraditya Madhavrao Scindia, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Chairman & Members, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science, Technology, Environment & Forests
Shri A K Seth, Cabinet Secretary, Government of India
Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Secretary, Union Ministry of Shipping
Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Smt. Vijay Laxmi Joshi, Additional Secretary , Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Ms Meera Mehrishi, Additional Secretary, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Shri Madhusudan Prasad, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Shri Rajeev Kher, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Ms Anita Agnihotri, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Shri Mukesh Bhatnagar, Additional DGFT, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Dr. Satish B. Agnihotri Director General of Shipping & Ex. Officio Additional Secretary to the Govt. of India
Ms Aditi Das Rout, Director, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Dr. Saroj, Director, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Dr. Manoranjan Hota, Director, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Dr Claude Alvares, Member, Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Dr D B Boralkar, Member, Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Shri Sanjay Parikh, Lawyer, Supreme Court
Miss Sunita Naraian, Director General, Centre for Science and Environment
Member Secretary, Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB)
Chairman, GPCB
Chairman, Gujarat Maritime Board
Shri S K Sharma, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board
Shri L S Singh, Union Ministry of Steel
ACB, Gandhinagar, CBI
Office of Commissioner, Customs, Ahmedabad
Hon'ble
Union Environment & Forests Minister
Government of India
New Delhi
Subject-Send dead toxic US ship, Exxon Valdez (now named MV Oriental N) away from Indian waters
Madam,
Pursuant to my letter dated 18/5/2012 to the Hon'ble Prime Minister and a letter dated April 2, 2012 to Union Shipping Minister, I wish to draw your urgent attention in the matter of environmental security concerns from the entry of dead US vessel, MV Oriental N (formerly Exxon Valdez, Oriental Nicety, Exxon Mediterranean, Sea River Mediterranean, S/R Mediterranean, Mediterranean, and Dong Fang Ocean), relevant Supreme Court orders and the need to send this vessel out of Indian waters.
I submit that if the Supreme Court's orders of 3rd May, 11th May and 14th May are read along with the attached two applications, it becomes clearer that the order has banned entry of the dead US ship Exxon Valdez (currently named MV Oriental Nicety) due to its failure to comply with UN's Basel Convention on Transboundary Movement of Hazardous to which India is a party. It has been renamed again as MV Oriental N. All the 3 orders in the Writ Petition (Civil) 657 of 1995 are available on imowatch.blogspot.com (Supreme Court orders of 3rd-11th, & 14th May on Exxon Valdez (MV Oriental Nicety, MV Oriental N) Case )
I submit that it is indeed quite shocking that despite non-compliance of the Basel Convention (& Supreme Court order of 14th October 2003 and 3rd May 2012) the dead US ship is still in Indian waters, off Mumbai. It is attempting to set a bad precedent for hundreds of such ships to be dumped in Indian waters in connivance by US Maritime Administration and some gullible Indian officials. I submit that even in the case of another dead and hazardous US ship, the real owners had taken Indian law enforcement agencies for a ride due to lack of coordination and cooperation between Union Shipping Ministry and Union Environment & Forests Ministry.
I submit that it is a second such ship originally from USA that is outwitting Indian laws. The USA’s regulations and European Union regulations prohibit the entry of such vessels. In an Office Memorandum No.29-3/2009-HSMD, Government of India, Ministry of Environment & Forests, (HSM Division) dated 9th May, 2011, relating to implementation of Supreme Court directions in respect of ship breaking activities, the previous dead and convicted US ship, Platinum II (Ex SS Oceanic, MV Oceanic) was denied beaching permission but it remained in Indian waters without beaching. It had left US waters despite indictment by US Environment Protection Agency with the apparent connivance of MARAD. It had entered Indian waters on fake documents.
I am attaching my application seeking enforcement of Basel Convention, recommendations of Inter-Ministerial Committee on shipbreaking and the Supreme Court orders and the application filed by Best Oasis company, subsidiary of Priya Blue company seeking permission to dismantle the dead and hazardous US ship in Indian waters.
I submit that Basel Convention Technical Guidelines for the Environmentally Sound Management of the Full and Partial Dismantling of Ships was adopted at the sixth meeting of the Conference of the Parties has to be followed. This 112 page guidelines provide information and recommendations on procedures, processes and practices that should be implemented to achieve Environmentally Sound Management at ship dismantling facilities. It identifies different environmental hazards and recommends specific measures to prevent it or reduce them. It also contains a list of wastes that may be inherent in the vessel structure or on board a ship. Finally, the guidelines provide advice on monitoring and verification of environmental performance. For details regarding Basel Convention visit: http://www.basel.int
I submit that is clear from the order that compliance with UN’s on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal which is part of Supreme Court's order dated October 14, 2003 is required. In the order dated May 3, 2012, Supreme Court had asked Union of India, Ministry of Shipping and Ministry of Environment & Forests “to inform this Court as to the steps being taken to prevent the ship berthing in any of the ports in India, without following the conditions indicated in the Basel Convention.”
I submit that strict compliance is required of the CPCB’s 'Environmental Guidelines for Shipbreaking industries' as well It reads: "Old vessels containing or contaminated with substances such as PCBs, waste asbestos dust and fibre, lead and lead compounds are accordingly classified as hazardous materials. The customs authority and /or the concerned State Maritime Board should ensure this and issue a certificate to this effect that the vessel is free from prohibited materials."
I submit that a 2004 report of the Directorate of Naval Intelligence, Union Ministry of Defence records:"some ships arriving at the breaking yards...may be involved in nefarious activities". It noted that a large number of cash buyers are Pakistani nationals based in London and the UAE. "Due to large profit margins, the Dawood group appears to have invested heavily in cash buyers thus having a stake in most deals”. It was recorded in a letter of the Standing Monitoring Committee on Ship breaking, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests in May 2011 that the Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB) and Customs were unable to verify the records of some of the ships. It was suggested that the DG shipping be authorized to first verify records before the ships are allowed to dock at the Alang yards. But the GMB officials said this would be acceptable to them only if the DG shipping was able to carry out such verification within 48 hours or it would presume that the records provided by the ship are authentic. This matter has not been resolved as yet.
I submit that the Minutes of the Supreme Court constituted Inter-ministerial committee (IMC) and a sensitive document of Union Ministry of Defence has been filed in the court that reveal how security concerns that emanate from ship breaking activity have been expressed. The relevant excerpts from the fourteen minutes dated February 5, 2004, June 11, 2004, January 19, 2005, June 28, 2005, February 1, 2006, September 21, 2006, January 1, 2007, August 9, 2007, February 28, 2008, February 4, 2009, October 5, 2009, October 5, 2010,September 17, 2010 , July 8, 2011 and February 28, 2012 are given below.
I submit that the minutes of 14th meeting of February 28, 2012 refers to “Security concerns” but does not reveal what has been the response to the several recommendations of IMC in the earlier meetings. The relevant part of the minutes of its 13th meeting reads: “Security concerns: The representative of Coast Guard brought to the notice of IMC that various foreign made communication equipment like emergency beacons brought on board of the ships and taken to breaking yards are not properly deactivated before dismantling the ships. The Coast Guard expressed concern from security angle as there were a few incidents of false alarms emanating from such equipments….” The issue of “false flag certification” was also raised.
I submit that “It was also clarified by GMB that the requisite information would also be sent to MOD” in the minutes. Subsequent to this the minutes of the 14th meeting does not reveal whether Ministry of Defence has been sent information that was promised.
I wish to draw your attention towards the minutes of the 12th meeting. It reads: “Security Concerns – In the last meeting, it had been decided that the Ministry of Shipping would organize a meeting on security matters with GMB, Naval HQ and Coast Guard HQ, Customs etc. to ensure that issues linked to gaps in the security frame-work are addressed on a priority basis. The representative of Naval HQ informed that they have already taken up the matter with the DG Shipping on 3 September 2009 highlighting the necessary precautionary security steps, including a monthly security meeting to be conducted by the Yard/Port Authority. The representative of the DG Shipping informed that the suggestions of the Naval HQ have been conveyed to the Gujarat Maritime Board.” It is not clear whether the suggestions of the Naval Headquarters have been acted upon.
I submit that the minutes of 11th meeting of IMC reads: “Security Concerns – The Coast Guard representative brought out some security concerns and incidents of communication sets from ships reportedly finding their way to the local fisherman.”
I submit that these concerns cannot be taken lightly. The minutes of the IMC meeting reads: “Security Concerns – Both the representative of the Coast Guard and the representative from Naval HQ raised concerns over the entry of ships carrying hazardous cargo to Alang for ship breaking and how no information is made available to them regarding the movement of ships to Alang. Besides this there was no information regarding whether the Alang Port is compliant with the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code. In the context of the present security concerns in the country, the Chairman advised the representative of the Ministry of Shipping, the GMB officials, the Coast Guard representative and the Naval HQs to address the issue expeditiously so that the security gaps are taken care of and also to verify whether the port at Alang has implemented the ISPS codes.” The entry of dead ships in Indian waters with fake documents reveals that security gaps have not been addressed.
I submit that IMC minutes reads: “Security concerns 16. Representatives of Naval Headquarter pointed out that because of large floating population at Alang it has become a breeding ground for mafia and other anti national elements who are indulging in nefarious activities. He further pointed out that sometimes vessels moving to Alang for breaking do not carry sufficient fuel and may also be not sea worthy. This may cause serious accidents at sea if such vessels are drifting in areas closer to oil field development areas. He therefore requested that there should be strict enforcement of account ability of ships reporting at Alang and the port authorities must share information with intelligence agencies. Further Naval Headquarters should also be informed about war ships and ships with sensitive cargo coming to Alang for ship breaking.” The radioactive wastes laden dead ships and war ships are indeed a matter of huge security concern.
I submit that the minutes of the another IMC meeting reads: “The Coast Guard representative and the Naval HQ representative also expressed apprehensions that the vessels coming in for beaching sometimes ply very close to the oil rigs, which could be a potential for accidents. Though the representative of the DG, Shipping clarified that the ships are to ply on pre-determined chartered routes, it was emphasized that the preventive measures on such matters need to be strengthened and ensure due compliance by all. The Chairman directed that the Ministry of Shipping may organize a meeting on the matter with GMB, Naval HQ and Coast Guard HQ, Custom etc. immediately and ensure that gaps in the security frame-work issues are addressed immediately.” There is a need to examine whether gaps in the security frame-work issues have been addressed as recently as during 2011-12 when 415 dead ships were dumped at Alang beach.
Let me take the opportunity to inform you that the May 3, 2012 order of Justice Altamas Kabir and Justice J. Chelameswar bench of Supreme Court in the matter of a US hazardous dead vessel named 'Oriental Nicety' (formerly Exxon Valdez, Exxon Mediterranean, Sea River Mediterranean, S/R Mediterranean, Mediterranean, and Dong Fang Ocean) that was trying to enter Indian waters at Alang beach Bhavnagar has sought compliance with UN’s Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal to which India is a party. This has vessel has been renamed as MV Oriental N, Gujarat.
I submit that The Washington Post news report, “The many lives of the Exxon Valdez”, March 29, 2012 disclosed that the vessel is on the way to Alang beach. It may be noted that in the year 2000-2001, the buyer of the vessel and the owner of Priya Blue Industries Pvt Ltd, Shri Sanjay P Mehta has been in the ship recycling business as he was engaged with “MARUTI METALS, LLC” in the US as a advisor at the recycling Site at Brownsville, Texas. It was involved in the dismantling of United States Adventure, a US Navy vessel as per the requirements of US Maritime Administration [MARAD] an agency within the US Department of Transportation. After the entrepreneurs of the "MARUTI METALS LLC" decided to close their business in US, Shri Mehta moved to India to further continue his recycling business in Alang-Sosiya, Gujarat India. Its 100% subsidiary, Best Oasis Limited, a newly formed company and a part of "Priya Blue Group" which is a "CASH BUYER" that purchases vessels on "As is Where is basis" to deliver the same for ship dismantling at Alang beach at the convenience of ship owners from developed countries. Hongkong based Best Oasis Limited is a purchaser, seller and financer of end-of-life ships.
I submit that the end-of-life ship 'Oriental Nicety' was purchased in March 2012 by a US based company Global Marketing Systems (GMS), which is one of the biggest, cash buyers for dead ships. It was sold to Best Oasis Company for about $16 million. The Bill of Sale of the ship alone can reveal its true or latent value. This 301 meters long tanker is 50 meters wide, 26 meters depth, weighing 30,000 tons empty and powered by a 23.60 MW diesel engine. US based National Steel and Shipbuilding Company built this tanker for Exxon Mobil Corporation, a US multinational oil and gas corporation and a direct descendant of John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company. It was built in San Diego, California in 1986.
I submit that the GMS was involved in the purchase of controversial radioactive and hazardous waste laden European ship SS Blue Lady (ex-SS Norway, SS France) and was also involved in the Blue Lady case and the dead hazardous US ship Platinum II (ex-MV Oceanic, SS Independence). Platinum II was indicted by US Environmental Protection Agency. This ship was denied beaching permission by Union Ministry of Environment & Forests but the Ministry’s intent was outwitted as the dead ship remained in Indian waters and was illegally scrapped at Gopnath anchorage point in Bhavnagar Gujarat.
In the past 23 years, the dead US vessel MV Oriental N (formerly Exxon Valdez, Oriental Nicety, Exxon Mediterranean, Sea River Mediterranean, S/R Mediterranean, Mediterranean, and Dong Fang Ocean) has been renamed several times. It has worked in at least three areas of the world since it ran aground on Bligh Reef in Alaska's Prince William Sound in March 1989. The 30,000-ton tanker ruptured eight of its 11 oil-storage tanks and spilled nearly 11 million gallons of crude oil into the ecologically rich area. Exxon Mobil spent $30 million to repair the single-hulled ship and moved it to its Mediterranean routes after the US banned the ship from Alaskan waters and a law was passed requiring double hulls on oil tankers.
I submit that the USA which is a non-party to Basel Convention appears to be testing the robustness to the regulatory regime. If a bad precedent is set by allowing this dead US ship, Indian waters will be flooded with hundreds of dead ships both of military and military origin in the aftermath of the lifting of moratorium on transfer of toxic ships to developing countries by US Government.
I submit that a letter to Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism & Culture informing it about a letter of Shri Rajgopal Sharma, Advisor, Indian Embassy, Brussels dated December 20, 2011 wherein it has been revealed that most of the dead and hazardous ships that are currently at Alang beach are in illegal traffic. The letter was based on Shri Sharma’s conversation with Shri Julio Garcia Burgues, Head of the Waste Management Unit, European Commission – DG Environment. This reveals that even EU is trying to transfer its dead ships to India.
In view of the above facts, there is a compelling logic to intervene earnestly to set matters right by sending the dead US ship away from Indian waters.
Thanking You
Yours faithfully
Gopal Krishna
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
New Delhi
PIN. 110016
Phone: +91-11-26517814, Fax: +91-11-26517814
Mb: 9818089660, 08002263335
E-mail:krishna1715@gmail.com
Web: toxicswatch.blogspot.com
Cc
Shri Anand Sharma, Union Minister of Commerce & Industry
Shri G K Vasan, Union Minister of Shipping
Smt Jayanthi Natrajan, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Shri Jyotiraditya Madhavrao Scindia, Union Minister of State, Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Chairman & Members, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science, Technology, Environment & Forests
Shri A K Seth, Cabinet Secretary, Government of India
Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Secretary, Union Ministry of Shipping
Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment & Forests
Smt. Vijay Laxmi Joshi, Additional Secretary , Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Ms Meera Mehrishi, Additional Secretary, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Shri Madhusudan Prasad, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Shri Rajeev Kher, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Ms Anita Agnihotri, Additional Secretary, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Shri Mukesh Bhatnagar, Additional DGFT, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Dr. Satish B. Agnihotri Director General of Shipping & Ex. Officio Additional Secretary to the Govt. of India
Ms Aditi Das Rout, Director, Union Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Dr. Saroj, Director, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Dr. Manoranjan Hota, Director, HSMD, Union Minister of Environment & Forests
Dr Claude Alvares, Member, Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Dr D B Boralkar, Member, Supreme Court Monitoring Committee on Hazardous Wastes
Shri Sanjay Parikh, Lawyer, Supreme Court
Miss Sunita Naraian, Director General, Centre for Science and Environment
Member Secretary, Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB)
Chairman, GPCB
Chairman, Gujarat Maritime Board
Shri S K Sharma, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board
Shri L S Singh, Union Ministry of Steel
ACB, Gandhinagar, CBI
Office of Commissioner, Customs, Ahmedabad
Supreme Court orders of 3rd-11th, & 14th May on Exxon Valdez (MV Oriental Nicety, MV Oriental N) Case
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.2 SECTION PIL
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. No. 61 of 2012 in W.P. (C) No. 657 of 1995
RESEARCH FOUNDN. FOR SCIENCE Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
U O I & ANR. Respondent(s)
(With application for directions)
Date: 14/05/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK VERMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
(VACATION BENCH)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Adv.
Mr. A.N. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Bushra Praveen, Adv.
Ms. Mamta Saxena, Adv.
For Respondent(s)/ Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.
Applicant Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. E.C. Agarwala, AOR
Mr. Rahul Khanna, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Goel, Adv.
Mr. Abhinav Agrawal, Adv.
For UOI Mr. T.S. Doabia, Sr. Adv.
& Ors. Mr. Ashok Bhan, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. Asha G. Nair, Adv.
Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv.
Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, Adv.
Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Sunil Roy, Adv.
Mr. S.S. Rawat, Adv.
Mr. D.L. Chidanand, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Adv.
Mr. A.K. Sharma, A.O.R.
Mr. Ashok Kumr Panda, Sr. Adv.
2
Mr. Rutwik Panda, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Verma, Adv.
Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Dhingra, Adv.
Mr. Mukul Singh, Adv.
Ms. Ruchika Bhai, Adv.
Mr. Hemantika Wahi, A.O.R.
Ms. Jesal, Adv.
Mr. R. Pradhan, Adv.
Mr. Pradeep Misra, Adv.
Mrs. Manik Karanjawala, A.O.R.
Mr. Anil Kumar Jha,A.O.R.
Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Dhawan, A.O.R.
Ms. Shobna M., A.O.R.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Interlocutory Application No.61 of 2012 has
been filed by M/s. Best Oasis Ltd.
Let notice of this I.A. be issued to the
petitioner of the writ petition as also respondents
Union of India and others.
(A.D. Sharma) (S.S.R. Krishna)
Court Master Court Master
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WP (C) 657/1995
1
ITEM NO.MM 2-I COURT NO.2 SECTION PIL
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. NO.61 OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.657 OF 1995
RESEARCH FOUNDN. FOR SCIENCE Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
U O I & ANR. Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for directions)
Date: 11/05/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, AOR
For Respondent(s)/ Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.
Applicant Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Adv.
Mr. E.C. Agarwala, AOR
Mr. Gaurav Goel, Adv.
Mr. Abhinav Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Dhawan, Adv.
Ms. Shobana M., Adv.
Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Adv.
Mr. A.K. Sharma, AOR
For Ministry of Mr. T.S. Doabia, Sr. Adv.
Shipping Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv.
Mr. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
For UOI Mr. Ashok Bhan, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. Asha G. Nair, Adv.
WP (C) 657/1995
2
Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Let this application be listed before the Vacation
Bench on Monday (14.05.2012), when the petitioner, Research
Foundation for Science, will be at liberty to take all
objections, as may be necessary, in regard to the question
of certification of the ship prior to its entry into Indian
territorial waters.
(Chetan Kumar) (Juginder Kaur)
Court Master Assistant Registrar
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W.P. (C) 657/1995
1
ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.2 SECTION PIL
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. NOS.23, 40, 42, 43, 55, 56 & 57 IN
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.657 OF 1995
RESEARCH FOUNDN. FOR SCIENCE Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
U O I & ANR. Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for directions and impleadment and clarification
and office report)
WITH CONMT. PET.(C) NO.155 of 2005
(With appln.(s) for directions and office report)
SLP(C) NO.16175 of 1997
(With appln.(s) for ex-parte stay and impleading party)
Civil Appeal NO.7660 of 1997
(With office report)
Date: 03/05/2012 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, AOR
Ms. Mamta Saxena, Adv.
Mr. A.N. Singh, Adv.
Ms. Bushra Praveena, Adv.
In SLP 16175/1997 Ms. B. Vijayalakshmi Menon, AOR
In CA 7660/1997 Mr. P. Parmeswaran, AOR
In CP 155/2005 BY POST
For Respondent(s) Mr. P.P. Malhotra, A.S.G.
UOI Mr. Ashok Bhan, Sr. Adv.
W.P. (C) 657/1995
2
Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, AOR
Mr. Manik Karanjawala, AOR
Mr. K.B. Rohtagi, AOR
Mr. Ashok Mathur, AOR
Mr. Shakil Ahmed Syed, AOR
For UPPCB Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR
Mr. Suraj Singh, Adv.
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
For State of Mr. Khwairakpam Nobin Singh, AOR
Manipur Mr. Sapan Biswajit Meitei, Adv.
Mr. Techi Poto, Adv.
For State of Mr. Anil Shrivastav, AOR
Arunachal Pradesh Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.
Mr. Amit Kumar, AOR
Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Radha Shyam Jena, AOR
Mrs. Urmila Sirur, AOR
Ms. Sushma Suri, AOR
Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR
For State of UP Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, AOR
Mr. Upendra Mishra, Adv.
M/s. Sinha & Das
Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, AOR
For State of Assam Ms. Vartika Sahay Walia, Adv.
for M/s. Corporate Law Group
Mr. Aruneshwar Gupta, AOR
W.P. (C) 657/1995
3
Mr. Janaranjan Das, AOR
Mr. Ejaj Maqbool, AOR
Ms. Bina Gupta, AOR
Ms. S. Janani, AOR
Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR
Mr. Atishi Dipankar, AOR
Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, AOR
Mr. P.S. Sudheer, AOR
For DPCC Mr. D.N. Goburdhan, AOR
Mr. Prabal Bagchi, Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Verma, Adv.
Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR
For Defaulter Nos. Mrs. Jayashree Wad, Adv.
3 to 7 Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv.
Ms. Tamali Wad, Adv.
Ms. Kanika, Adv.
for M/s. J.S. Wad & Co.
Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR
Ms. Binu Tamta, AOR
Mr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, AOR
Mr. E.C. Agrawal, AOR
Mr. R. Satish, AOR
Mr. Jay Savla, AOR
Mr. A. Raghunath, AOR
Mr. Ravindra Kumar, AOR
For R-7 Mr. Mohan Prasaran, A.S.G.
Mr. Sunil Roy, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Asha G. Nair, Adv.
Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, Adv.
W.P. (C) 657/1995
4
Mr. D.S. Mahra, AOR
For Ministry of Mr. T.S. Doabial, Sr. Adv.
Shipping Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. D.S. Mahra, AOR
Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR
Mr. Pragyan P. Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Rupesh Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Mandakini Sharma, Adv.
Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran, AOR
Mr. S. Muthu Krishnan, Adv.
Mr. Gautam Dhamija, Adv.
Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR
Ms. Sumita Hazarika, AOR
Mr. D.N. Mishra, AOR
For State of MP Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, AOR
For Govt. of Mr. V.G. Pragasam, Adv.
Puducherry Mr. S.J. Aristotle, Adv.
Mr. Praburamasubramanian, Adv.
State of Haryana Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, AOR
Mr. Pramod Dayal, AOR
Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, AOR
Mr. B.V. Balaram Das, AOR
For State of Ms. Asha G. Nair, AOR
Maharashtra
For State of Dr. Manish Singhvi, AAG
Rajasthan Mr. Abhinav Ramkrishna, Adv.
Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv.
Ms. B. Sunita Rao, Adv.
In CP 155/2005 Mr. M.J. Paul, AOR
Mr. Sudarsh Menon, AOR
For Orissa SPCB Mr. A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv.
W.P. (C) 657/1995
5
Mr. Satyabrata Panda, Adv.
Mr. Rutwik Panda, AOR
In CA 8300-8301/04 Mrs. Nandini Gore, AOR
For State of Gujarat Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
Ms. Jesal, Adv.
Ms. Rojalin Pradhan, Adv.
For Bhopal Group Ms. Karuna Nandy, Adv.
for Information & Ms. Aparna Bhat, AOR
Action
Mr. Shekhar Kumar, AOR
For SCMC Mr. Raj Panjwani, Sr. Adv.
For CPCB Mr. Vijay Panjwani, Adv.
For Dinesh Chandra Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv.
Applicant in IA 23 Mr. C. Mukund, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Jain, Adv.
Mr. Pankaj Jain, Adv.
Mr. P.V. Saravana Raja, Adv.
Mr. Bijoy Kumar Jain, AOR
For R-8/ Ludhiana Mr. Chirag Jamwal, Adv.
Refineries
For Official Mr. Manish Bishnoi, Adv.
Liquidator
For M/o Customs & Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv.
Excise Mr. T.A. Khan, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
In response to the prayers made in I.A. No.43 of
2007, filed by one Mr. Kishore R. Shah, a Member of the
Citizen Council, Chala Vapi, we had directed the States of
Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat to file affidavits with regard to
the supply of fresh drinking water to the affected areas.
As far as the State of Gujarat is concerned, Ms. Hemantika
Wahi, learned senior Standing Counsel for the State of Gujarat, has filed an affidavit and has also indicated that
steps have already been taken to supply fresh drinking water
in the areas, in and around Wapi and Ankleshwar.
Mr. Sanjay Parikh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, may
seek instructions in regard to the statements made in the
said affidavit and report back to us.
As far as Bhopal is concerned, an affidavit has been
filed on behalf of the State, affirmed by the City Engineer
of the Municipal Corporation of Bhopal, stating that steps
have been taken in the fourteen localities, indicated by the
applicant and the Bhopal Group for Information and Action,
for supplying drinking water by overground pipelines to the
inhabitants of the said fourteen localities.
Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, learned counsel appearing for the State of
Madhya Pradesh, has submitted that while the main pipelines
have been laid, a decision has also been
taken by the Municipality to provide each individual household with a
separate tap connection and that steps are being taken in
that regard. Ms. Makhija has also submitted that the matter
is in the process of execution and will take some time to
complete.
Ms. Karuna Nundy, learned counsel appearing for Bhopal Group for Information and Action, submits that the said Non-Governmental Organization has been working with the municipal authorities, not only in identifying the areas, but also in trying to expedite the work of laying down the
pipelines for supply of fresh drinking water. She also
7 submits that though the work is being undertaken, it is progressing at a very slow pace.
Ms. Nundy has also pointed out certain discrepancies
indicated in the Chart, which has been made Annexure A-2 to
the affidavit filed on behalf of the NGO.
Since, admittedly, steps are being taken to provide
the fourteen identified areas and the four additional areas,
which have been subsequently identified, with fresh drinking
water through pipelines, the only order that we are inclined
to pass today is for expedition of the work.
Although, we are informed that the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee,
which had earlier been appointed, has almost become defunct,
as also the local Committees appointed by it in different
areas, we are of the view that there should be a Monitoring
Committee to oversee the part of the work, which is now
being undertaken by the Bhopal Municipality for providing
fresh drinking water to the eighteen affected areas near the
Plant.
Accordingly, we constitute a Committee for the aforesaid purpose, with the Executive Chairman of the Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority as the Chairperson of the Committee, which will include (1) The Commissioner, Gas
Relief and Rehabilitation, (2) The Commissioner, Bhopal Municipality, (3) The Executive Engineer, Bhopal Municipal
Corporation, (4) The Member Secretary of the Madhya Pradesh
State Pollution Control Board, (5) a member from the Bhopal
Group for Information and Action, a person nominated by the
Research Foundation for Science, the petitioner in the writ
petition itself, and the Member Secretary of the Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Committee.
The other Non-Governmental Organizations, who have been assisting in the process of providing fresh drinking
water or other activities to provide relief for the people
of the different areas, may continue to assist the Committee
in the work of implementing the scheme for providing fresh
drinking water to the people of the various localities indicated.
The entire exercise should be completed within three months from the date of communication of this order to the Executive Chairman of the State Legal Services Authority and the Members of the Committee and both the State Government
and the Bhopal Municipal Corporation, shall ensure that the work does not suffer or is not obstructed on account of inadequate or insufficient funds.
Let copies of this order be made available to Mr. Sanjay Parikh, learned counsel for the Research Foundation for Science, who is requested to communicate the same to all the concerned authorities and each of the Members of the aforesaid Committee.
The Committee, thus appointed, is to submit its report to this Court, with regard to the work undertaken in terms of this order, on 13th August, 2012, when I.A. No.43 of 2007, along with the other
connected applications, are to be listed for further consideration.
Mr. Sanjay Parikh also submitted that a separate interlocutory application has been filed, which is yet to be numbered, in which it has been indicated that a foreign ship, which is alleged to be contaminated, has entered into Indian Waters, though, it has not yet been allowed to berth in any of the ports, without taking proper steps for decontamination in the port of export. A copy has been provided to Mr. Ashok Bhan, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India and Mr. T.S. Doabia, learned senior counsel, who submits that he is appearing on behalf of the Ministry of Shipping, Government of India. Both, Mr. Bhan and Mr. Doabia, are requested to take instructions on the statements made in the interlocutory application and to inform this Court as to the steps being taken to prevent the ship berthing in any of the ports in India, without following the conditions indicated in the Basel Convention.
The respondents in the interlocutory application will be entitled to file their respective counter affidavits to the same, within six weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
Let this interlocutory application, as well as the other connected interlocutory applications, be listed on 13th August, 2012, also.
The Convenience File, which had been filed on behalf of the alleged contemnors in the contempt petition filed, be tagged with I.A. No.23 of 2007.
(Chetan Kumar) (Juginder Kaur)
Court Master Assistant Registrar
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. No. 61 of 2012 in W.P. (C) No. 657 of 1995
RESEARCH FOUNDN. FOR SCIENCE Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
U O I & ANR. Respondent(s)
(With application for directions)
Date: 14/05/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK VERMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
(VACATION BENCH)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Adv.
Mr. A.N. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Bushra Praveen, Adv.
Ms. Mamta Saxena, Adv.
For Respondent(s)/ Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.
Applicant Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. E.C. Agarwala, AOR
Mr. Rahul Khanna, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Goel, Adv.
Mr. Abhinav Agrawal, Adv.
For UOI Mr. T.S. Doabia, Sr. Adv.
& Ors. Mr. Ashok Bhan, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. Asha G. Nair, Adv.
Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv.
Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, Adv.
Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Sunil Roy, Adv.
Mr. S.S. Rawat, Adv.
Mr. D.L. Chidanand, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Adv.
Mr. A.K. Sharma, A.O.R.
Mr. Ashok Kumr Panda, Sr. Adv.
2
Mr. Rutwik Panda, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Verma, Adv.
Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Dhingra, Adv.
Mr. Mukul Singh, Adv.
Ms. Ruchika Bhai, Adv.
Mr. Hemantika Wahi, A.O.R.
Ms. Jesal, Adv.
Mr. R. Pradhan, Adv.
Mr. Pradeep Misra, Adv.
Mrs. Manik Karanjawala, A.O.R.
Mr. Anil Kumar Jha,A.O.R.
Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Dhawan, A.O.R.
Ms. Shobna M., A.O.R.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Interlocutory Application No.61 of 2012 has
been filed by M/s. Best Oasis Ltd.
Let notice of this I.A. be issued to the
petitioner of the writ petition as also respondents
Union of India and others.
(A.D. Sharma) (S.S.R. Krishna)
Court Master Court Master
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WP (C) 657/1995
1
ITEM NO.MM 2-I COURT NO.2 SECTION PIL
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. NO.61 OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.657 OF 1995
RESEARCH FOUNDN. FOR SCIENCE Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
U O I & ANR. Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for directions)
Date: 11/05/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, AOR
For Respondent(s)/ Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.
Applicant Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Adv.
Mr. E.C. Agarwala, AOR
Mr. Gaurav Goel, Adv.
Mr. Abhinav Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Dhawan, Adv.
Ms. Shobana M., Adv.
Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Adv.
Mr. A.K. Sharma, AOR
For Ministry of Mr. T.S. Doabia, Sr. Adv.
Shipping Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv.
Mr. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
For UOI Mr. Ashok Bhan, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. Asha G. Nair, Adv.
WP (C) 657/1995
2
Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Let this application be listed before the Vacation
Bench on Monday (14.05.2012), when the petitioner, Research
Foundation for Science, will be at liberty to take all
objections, as may be necessary, in regard to the question
of certification of the ship prior to its entry into Indian
territorial waters.
(Chetan Kumar) (Juginder Kaur)
Court Master Assistant Registrar
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W.P. (C) 657/1995
1
ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.2 SECTION PIL
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. NOS.23, 40, 42, 43, 55, 56 & 57 IN
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.657 OF 1995
RESEARCH FOUNDN. FOR SCIENCE Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
U O I & ANR. Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for directions and impleadment and clarification
and office report)
WITH CONMT. PET.(C) NO.155 of 2005
(With appln.(s) for directions and office report)
SLP(C) NO.16175 of 1997
(With appln.(s) for ex-parte stay and impleading party)
Civil Appeal NO.7660 of 1997
(With office report)
Date: 03/05/2012 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, AOR
Ms. Mamta Saxena, Adv.
Mr. A.N. Singh, Adv.
Ms. Bushra Praveena, Adv.
In SLP 16175/1997 Ms. B. Vijayalakshmi Menon, AOR
In CA 7660/1997 Mr. P. Parmeswaran, AOR
In CP 155/2005 BY POST
For Respondent(s) Mr. P.P. Malhotra, A.S.G.
UOI Mr. Ashok Bhan, Sr. Adv.
W.P. (C) 657/1995
2
Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, AOR
Mr. Manik Karanjawala, AOR
Mr. K.B. Rohtagi, AOR
Mr. Ashok Mathur, AOR
Mr. Shakil Ahmed Syed, AOR
For UPPCB Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR
Mr. Suraj Singh, Adv.
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
For State of Mr. Khwairakpam Nobin Singh, AOR
Manipur Mr. Sapan Biswajit Meitei, Adv.
Mr. Techi Poto, Adv.
For State of Mr. Anil Shrivastav, AOR
Arunachal Pradesh Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.
Mr. Amit Kumar, AOR
Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Radha Shyam Jena, AOR
Mrs. Urmila Sirur, AOR
Ms. Sushma Suri, AOR
Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR
For State of UP Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, AOR
Mr. Upendra Mishra, Adv.
M/s. Sinha & Das
Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, AOR
For State of Assam Ms. Vartika Sahay Walia, Adv.
for M/s. Corporate Law Group
Mr. Aruneshwar Gupta, AOR
W.P. (C) 657/1995
3
Mr. Janaranjan Das, AOR
Mr. Ejaj Maqbool, AOR
Ms. Bina Gupta, AOR
Ms. S. Janani, AOR
Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR
Mr. Atishi Dipankar, AOR
Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, AOR
Mr. P.S. Sudheer, AOR
For DPCC Mr. D.N. Goburdhan, AOR
Mr. Prabal Bagchi, Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Verma, Adv.
Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR
For Defaulter Nos. Mrs. Jayashree Wad, Adv.
3 to 7 Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv.
Ms. Tamali Wad, Adv.
Ms. Kanika, Adv.
for M/s. J.S. Wad & Co.
Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR
Ms. Binu Tamta, AOR
Mr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, AOR
Mr. E.C. Agrawal, AOR
Mr. R. Satish, AOR
Mr. Jay Savla, AOR
Mr. A. Raghunath, AOR
Mr. Ravindra Kumar, AOR
For R-7 Mr. Mohan Prasaran, A.S.G.
Mr. Sunil Roy, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Asha G. Nair, Adv.
Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, Adv.
W.P. (C) 657/1995
4
Mr. D.S. Mahra, AOR
For Ministry of Mr. T.S. Doabial, Sr. Adv.
Shipping Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. D.S. Mahra, AOR
Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR
Mr. Pragyan P. Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Rupesh Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Mandakini Sharma, Adv.
Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran, AOR
Mr. S. Muthu Krishnan, Adv.
Mr. Gautam Dhamija, Adv.
Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR
Ms. Sumita Hazarika, AOR
Mr. D.N. Mishra, AOR
For State of MP Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, AOR
For Govt. of Mr. V.G. Pragasam, Adv.
Puducherry Mr. S.J. Aristotle, Adv.
Mr. Praburamasubramanian, Adv.
State of Haryana Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, AOR
Mr. Pramod Dayal, AOR
Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, AOR
Mr. B.V. Balaram Das, AOR
For State of Ms. Asha G. Nair, AOR
Maharashtra
For State of Dr. Manish Singhvi, AAG
Rajasthan Mr. Abhinav Ramkrishna, Adv.
Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv.
Ms. B. Sunita Rao, Adv.
In CP 155/2005 Mr. M.J. Paul, AOR
Mr. Sudarsh Menon, AOR
For Orissa SPCB Mr. A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv.
W.P. (C) 657/1995
5
Mr. Satyabrata Panda, Adv.
Mr. Rutwik Panda, AOR
In CA 8300-8301/04 Mrs. Nandini Gore, AOR
For State of Gujarat Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
Ms. Jesal, Adv.
Ms. Rojalin Pradhan, Adv.
For Bhopal Group Ms. Karuna Nandy, Adv.
for Information & Ms. Aparna Bhat, AOR
Action
Mr. Shekhar Kumar, AOR
For SCMC Mr. Raj Panjwani, Sr. Adv.
For CPCB Mr. Vijay Panjwani, Adv.
For Dinesh Chandra Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv.
Applicant in IA 23 Mr. C. Mukund, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Jain, Adv.
Mr. Pankaj Jain, Adv.
Mr. P.V. Saravana Raja, Adv.
Mr. Bijoy Kumar Jain, AOR
For R-8/ Ludhiana Mr. Chirag Jamwal, Adv.
Refineries
For Official Mr. Manish Bishnoi, Adv.
Liquidator
For M/o Customs & Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv.
Excise Mr. T.A. Khan, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
In response to the prayers made in I.A. No.43 of
2007, filed by one Mr. Kishore R. Shah, a Member of the
Citizen Council, Chala Vapi, we had directed the States of
Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat to file affidavits with regard to
the supply of fresh drinking water to the affected areas.
As far as the State of Gujarat is concerned, Ms. Hemantika
Wahi, learned senior Standing Counsel for the State of Gujarat, has filed an affidavit and has also indicated that
steps have already been taken to supply fresh drinking water
in the areas, in and around Wapi and Ankleshwar.
Mr. Sanjay Parikh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, may
seek instructions in regard to the statements made in the
said affidavit and report back to us.
As far as Bhopal is concerned, an affidavit has been
filed on behalf of the State, affirmed by the City Engineer
of the Municipal Corporation of Bhopal, stating that steps
have been taken in the fourteen localities, indicated by the
applicant and the Bhopal Group for Information and Action,
for supplying drinking water by overground pipelines to the
inhabitants of the said fourteen localities.
Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, learned counsel appearing for the State of
Madhya Pradesh, has submitted that while the main pipelines
have been laid, a decision has also been
taken by the Municipality to provide each individual household with a
separate tap connection and that steps are being taken in
that regard. Ms. Makhija has also submitted that the matter
is in the process of execution and will take some time to
complete.
Ms. Karuna Nundy, learned counsel appearing for Bhopal Group for Information and Action, submits that the said Non-Governmental Organization has been working with the municipal authorities, not only in identifying the areas, but also in trying to expedite the work of laying down the
pipelines for supply of fresh drinking water. She also
7 submits that though the work is being undertaken, it is progressing at a very slow pace.
Ms. Nundy has also pointed out certain discrepancies
indicated in the Chart, which has been made Annexure A-2 to
the affidavit filed on behalf of the NGO.
Since, admittedly, steps are being taken to provide
the fourteen identified areas and the four additional areas,
which have been subsequently identified, with fresh drinking
water through pipelines, the only order that we are inclined
to pass today is for expedition of the work.
Although, we are informed that the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee,
which had earlier been appointed, has almost become defunct,
as also the local Committees appointed by it in different
areas, we are of the view that there should be a Monitoring
Committee to oversee the part of the work, which is now
being undertaken by the Bhopal Municipality for providing
fresh drinking water to the eighteen affected areas near the
Plant.
Accordingly, we constitute a Committee for the aforesaid purpose, with the Executive Chairman of the Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority as the Chairperson of the Committee, which will include (1) The Commissioner, Gas
Relief and Rehabilitation, (2) The Commissioner, Bhopal Municipality, (3) The Executive Engineer, Bhopal Municipal
Corporation, (4) The Member Secretary of the Madhya Pradesh
State Pollution Control Board, (5) a member from the Bhopal
Group for Information and Action, a person nominated by the
Research Foundation for Science, the petitioner in the writ
petition itself, and the Member Secretary of the Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Committee.
The other Non-Governmental Organizations, who have been assisting in the process of providing fresh drinking
water or other activities to provide relief for the people
of the different areas, may continue to assist the Committee
in the work of implementing the scheme for providing fresh
drinking water to the people of the various localities indicated.
The entire exercise should be completed within three months from the date of communication of this order to the Executive Chairman of the State Legal Services Authority and the Members of the Committee and both the State Government
and the Bhopal Municipal Corporation, shall ensure that the work does not suffer or is not obstructed on account of inadequate or insufficient funds.
Let copies of this order be made available to Mr. Sanjay Parikh, learned counsel for the Research Foundation for Science, who is requested to communicate the same to all the concerned authorities and each of the Members of the aforesaid Committee.
The Committee, thus appointed, is to submit its report to this Court, with regard to the work undertaken in terms of this order, on 13th August, 2012, when I.A. No.43 of 2007, along with the other
connected applications, are to be listed for further consideration.
Mr. Sanjay Parikh also submitted that a separate interlocutory application has been filed, which is yet to be numbered, in which it has been indicated that a foreign ship, which is alleged to be contaminated, has entered into Indian Waters, though, it has not yet been allowed to berth in any of the ports, without taking proper steps for decontamination in the port of export. A copy has been provided to Mr. Ashok Bhan, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India and Mr. T.S. Doabia, learned senior counsel, who submits that he is appearing on behalf of the Ministry of Shipping, Government of India. Both, Mr. Bhan and Mr. Doabia, are requested to take instructions on the statements made in the interlocutory application and to inform this Court as to the steps being taken to prevent the ship berthing in any of the ports in India, without following the conditions indicated in the Basel Convention.
The respondents in the interlocutory application will be entitled to file their respective counter affidavits to the same, within six weeks. Rejoinder thereto, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
Let this interlocutory application, as well as the other connected interlocutory applications, be listed on 13th August, 2012, also.
The Convenience File, which had been filed on behalf of the alleged contemnors in the contempt petition filed, be tagged with I.A. No.23 of 2007.
(Chetan Kumar) (Juginder Kaur)
Court Master Assistant Registrar
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
