Case Note & Summary
The present Writ Appeals were filed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 18.08.2020 in WP.No.9050 & 9119 of 2020. The appellants, being associations and institutions imparting maritime pre-sea courses, challenged a Circular dated 24.04.2020 issued by the Directorate General of Shipping (2nd respondent). The Circular directed institutions to admit students only when there is a secured place for on-board training in a shipping company and to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with such companies. The brief facts reveal that the members of the petitioners have been conducting maritime courses ranging from six months to four years. The 2nd respondent, as the regulatory body, used to grant approval for institutions. Earlier, a similar Circular dated 24.10.2019 was challenged in a batch of writ petitions in WP.No.40370 of 2016. In that matter, this Court vide order dated 09.09.2019 examined the authority of the 2nd respondent and the validity of conditions imposed in the Circular. The Court held that the 2nd respondent has authority to regulate maritime education and is competent to issue circulars. However, considering the onerous responsibility upon educational institutions, the Court held that compulsory placement in a shipping company for a specified period is unconstitutional and ultra vires, and also held that the condition to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the shipping company is onerous. Accordingly, such condition was ordered to be struck down. In pursuance to the above order, the 2nd respondent issued the impugned Circular on 24.04.2020. The present appeals challenge the validity of this Circular. The Court, after hearing the parties, upheld the regulatory authority of the 2nd respondent but reiterated that the condition of compulsory placement is unconstitutional and the condition to enter into MoU is onerous. The Court directed that the impugned Circular be modified accordingly.
Headnote
A) Maritime Education - Regulatory Authority - Validity of Circular - The Directorate General of Shipping has authority to regulate maritime education and issue circulars imposing conditions for approval of courses - However, condition requiring compulsory placement of students in a shipping company for a specified period is unconstitutional and ultra vires - Condition to enter into Memorandum of Understanding with shipping companies is onerous and struck down (Paras 3-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned Circular dated 24.04.2020 issued by the Directorate General of Shipping, requiring maritime institutions to admit students only when there is a secured place for on-board training and to enter into Memorandum of Understanding with shipping companies, is valid and within the regulatory authority of the 2nd respondent.
Final Decision
The Court upheld the regulatory authority of the Directorate General of Shipping but struck down the condition of compulsory placement in a shipping company as unconstitutional and ultra vires, and also held the condition to enter into Memorandum of Understanding as onerous. The impugned Circular was ordered to be modified accordingly.
Law Points
- Regulatory authority of Directorate General of Shipping
- Validity of circulars imposing conditions on maritime education
- Unconstitutionality of compulsory placement in shipping companies
- Onerous conditions in educational regulations
