Madras High Court
Jegan Arputham Fernando … vs Union Of India on 26 November, 2025
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 09.10.2025
PRONOUNCED ON : 26.11.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 & 9887 of 2025
and
W.M.P.Nos. 36081 of 2023 & 11135 of 2025
W.P.No.36121 of 2023
Jegan Arputham Fernando …. Petitioner
Vs
1. Union of India,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Port, Shipping and Waterways,
No.1, Parliament Street,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2. The Director General of Shipping,
Beta Buildings, 9th Floor,
i-think Techno Campus,
Kanjur Marg (East),
Mumbai – 400 042.
3. The Nautical Surveyor-cum-
Deputy Director General (Tech.),
At Office of Director General of Shipping,
Beta Buildings, 9th Floor,
i-think Techno Campus,
Kanjur Marg (East),
Mumbai – 400 042.
Page 1 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records
relating to impugned communication letter of the third respondent in his
letter in F.No.25/12/2023-NT-DGS (Comp.No.23689) dated 12.09.2023,
and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to conduct
existing course of conversion of assessment and examination for issuance
of Certificate of Competency/COC of Master (FG)(unlimited) for the
candidates of Master NCV (home trade ship), enabling the petitioner to
go world-wide on ships without any restrictions.
W.P.No.9887 of 2025
1. N.A.S.Berlin Fernando
2. P.J.Francis Vladin
3. Devkant Pandey
4. Sushil Kumar Singh
5. Shambu Kumar Sinha
6. Mangalsingh H.Pradeshi
7. Abhijit Ashok Bhatkhande
8. Santhose B.Fernandes
9. Pankaj Singh
10. P.N.Raju
11. Rosan Joseph Nelliparambath
12. Gautam Kumar
13. P.A.Fernando .... Petitioners
Vs
1. Union of India,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Port, Shipping and Waterways,
No.1, Parliament Street,
New Delhi – 110 001.
Page 2 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
2. The Director General of Shipping,
Beta Buildings,
9th Floor,
i-think Techno Campus,
Kanjur Marg (East),
Mumbai – 400 042.
3. The Nautical Surveyor-cum-
Deputy Director General (Tech.),
Having Office at Director General of Shipping,
Beta Buildings,
9th Floor,
i-think Techno Campus,
Kanjur Marg (East),
Mumbai – 400 042.
4. The Registrar,
Indian Maritime University,
ECR, Uthandi,
Kanathur,
Chennai – 600 119. ..... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to
implement the M.S. (Merchant Shipping) Rules 2014, (Standards of
Training, Certification, Watch keeping recognising for Sea Farers
(STCW) Rules 2014 and the Training, Examination & Assessment
Programme (TEAP) Manual, notified on 30.07.2014 and brought into
force on 01.01.2015 together with the Notice in M.S.No.1 of 2006 with
immediate effect and direct the respondents to make provisions to
recognize and issue certificates to the petitioners as “Master (FG)”, on the
completion of the conversion course prescribed in the Notice in M.S.No.1
of 2006 & Training Programme on the subject of Navigation.
Page 3 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Anil Sandeep
(in both W.Ps) for Mr.N.Vijaya Basker
For R1 to R3 : Mr.ARL.Sundaresan
(in both W.Ps) Additional Solicitor General (India)
Assisted by Mrs.V.Sudha
Special Panel Counsel
For R4 : Mr.K.Srinivasa Murthy
(in W.P.No.9887/2025) Standing Counsel
COMMON ORDER
W.P.No.36121 of 2023 has been filed challenging the order passed
by the third respondent dated 12.09.2023, thereby rejecting the request
made by the petitioner for conducting the conversion course towards
assessment and examination for issuance of Master-Foreign-Going Ship
(FG) unlimited Certificate of Competency by way of a bridging course.
2.W.P.No.9887 of 2025 has been filed seeking a direction to the
respondents to implement the Merchant Shipping Rules 2014, Standards
of Training Certification Watchkeeping recognizing for Sea Farers Rules,
2014 and the Training Examination and Assessment Programme Manual,
notified on 30.07.2014 and brought into force on 01.01.2015 together
with the Notice in M.S.No.1 of 2006 and to make provisions to recognise
and issue certificates to the petitioners as “Master (FG)”, on the
completion of the conversion course.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
3.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused
the materials available on record. Both the prayers are similar in nature
and as such, this Court passes a common order.
4.The petitioners are seafarers serving at sea in various capacities
and positions. They are designated as Masters (Near Coastal Voyage)
(hereinafter referred to as “ Master (NCV)”). In order to reach the
position of Master (NCV), they are required to undergo various courses
and training programmes. A Seaman is the initial or basic post in a
seafarer's career. The basic qualification is 10 th Standard (Matriculation).
Thereafter two pathways are available : one by studying the subjects of
Physics, Chemistry and Maths (hereinafter referred to as “PCM”) up to
the 12th Standard or by completing the 12 th Standard without PCM
subjects. After completion of the higher secondary education, a candidate
must enroll for seaman training by undergoing the continuous discharge
certificate course for a period of ten months at a recognized institution.
Thereafter, a mandatory sea-service experience of 18 months is required,
subsequent to which, the candidate can apply for assessment before the
Mercantile Marine Department under the second respondent. On
successful assessment, the candidates become eligible to pursue officer
rank posts.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
5.After obtaining the assessment certificate, a candidate becomes
eligible to pursue the officers rank course. The sea vessels are divided
into two categories. The first category is designated as “Near Coastal
Voyage” (hereinafter referred to as “NCV”), which operates to ports in
Bangladesh, India, Maldives, Myanmar, Sri Lanka (hereinafter referred to
as “BIMMS”). The second category is designated as “Foreign Going”
(hereinafter referred to as “FG”) which has no travel restrictions and may
operate to ports worldwide. The officers serving on NCV vessels are
termed as Navigational Watch Keeping Officers (hereinafter referred to as
“NWKO”). In order to pursue the officers course for NCV vessels, the
qualification of 12th Standard with PCM is not mandatory. The
candidates who have completed 12th Standard in any stream are eligible to
pursue the NCV officers course. However, for FG vessels, the
qualification of 12th Standard with PCM is mandatory. In respect of FG
vessels, the office rank hierarchy consists of the posts of Second Mate,
First Mate and Master. Those who had completed the officers course are
posted as NWKO, whereas those who complete the FG officers course
are posted as Second Mate. The post of Master on FG vessels carries
more weightage, demand and reputation. Likewise, the post of Second
Mate and First Mate on FG vessels have more value than their equivalent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
ranks on NCV vessels. It is to bridge this gap and to provide a pathway
for officers, who intends to cross over from their respective positions in
NCV vessels to that of their equivalent positions on FG vessels, the first
respondent, under the aegis of the second respondent, issued Merchant
Shipping (M.S) Notice No.1 of 2006, which provided for cross over of
the officers from NCV vessels to FG vessels on their completion of
eighteen months of service in their respective posts. The mandatory
qualification for them is completion of 12th Standard with PCM.
Subsequently, the Merchant Shipping (Standards of Training,
Certification Watchkeeping recognizing for Sea Farers) Rules, 2014
(hereinafter referred to as “STCW Rules 2014”) and the Training,
Examination and Assessment Programme (TEAP) Manual framed
thereunder came into force, in addition to the provisions contained in
M.S.Notice No.1 of 2006, thereby excluding the conversion of the post of
Master (NCV) to Master (FG). But there has been no implementation of
these Rules. After STCW Rules 2014, the implementation for conversion
of Master (NCV) to Master (FG) has also come to a stand still.
6.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that
even as per record, in these Rules and Manuals, there exists a glaring
vaccum. The provisions relating to cross over and bridging of Master
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
th th
(NCV), who possess 10 Standard or 12 Standard qualification with
PCM have not been provided for in the said Rules and Manuals. As per
the Manual, a Master (NCV) without PCM qualification can only be
considered for the post of Second Mate on FG vessals. Whereas the
NWKO (NCV) with 10th Standard or 12th Standard with PCM is permitted
to cross over to the post of Second Mate on FG vessels, which is a
equivalent post. Similarly, the Chief Mate (NCV) with 10 th Standard or
12th Standard with PCM qualification is permitted to cross over to the
post of Chief Mate on FG vessels having a tonnage between 500 and
3000. Therefore, the Rules and Manuals are silent with respect to the
cross over of Master (NCV) with 10 th Standard and 12th Standard with
PCM qualification. Hence, in view of this vaccum in the STCW Rules,
2014, the notice in M.S.No.1 of 2006 is required to be followed.
7.The learned counsel further submits that in fact, the syllabus of
the Master (NCV) and Master (FG) are one and the same and the subject
code are identical, except for an additional chapter of Navigation added to
the syllabus of Master (FG). Therefore, making the officers wait and
suffer is of no use to anyone and is drastically bringing down their value
among peers. Hence, the petitioners seek a direction to implement the
Rules and to provide equivalent post on FG vessels upon them
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
undergoing the prescribed training in Navigation, as required in the
syllabus for Master (FG), by adhering to the Notice in M.S.No.1 of 2006.
The said request was rejected in W.P.No.36121 of 2023 on the ground
that the Certificate of Competency is issued in accordance with the
International Convention of Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), 1978, as amended, to which India
is a party and which India implements by way of relevant provisions
under Merchant Shipping Act 1958, as amended the STCW Rules, 2014
and the TEAP Manual. There are no provisions under the Merchant
Shipping Act or the STCW Rules with respect to conversion of Master
(NCV) Certificate of Competency limited to 6000 GT to Master (FG)
unlimited Certificate of Competency by way of a bridging course. The
learned counsel contends that the petitioners cannot be denied of their
legitimate expectations.
8.In support of his contention, the learned counsel relied upon the
Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
Sivanandan C T and others V. High Court of Kerala and others in W.P.
(Civil) No.229 of 2017 rendered by the Constitutional Bench on
12.07.2023, wherein it was held that the Government’s action led to the
denial of the substantive legitimate expectations of the lecturers, and that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
the doctrine of substantive legitimate expectations is firmly entrenched in
Indian administrative law, subject to the limitations on its applicability in
a given factual situations.
9.A perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents 1 to 3,
as well as the submissions made by the learned Additional Advocate
General, reveals that the Notice in M.S.No.1 of 2006, which the
petitioners seek to enforce, has already been superseded by the STCW
Rules, 2014. Therefore, it has no legal efficacy and enforceability. The
STCW Rules 2014 have been framed in exercise of the powers conferred
under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 and is also confirmed with the
international STCW convention applicable to Indian seafarers. It is
pertinent to note that India is a signatory to the STCW convention and is
bound to comply with the global standards prescribed under the STCW.
Therefore, the demand for a cross over from Master (NCV) to Master
(FG) vessel cannot be permitted without fulfilling the prescribed
international and statutory criteria. This Court cannot issue a writ of
mandamus directing the legislature or rule-making authority to frame
laws or policies in a particular manner, especially when the statute
provides no such obligation or confers no corresponding legal right.
Therefore, no Constitutional Court can issue a writ of mandamus
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
compelling the legislature to enact a law on a particular subject in a
particular manner. After framing of STCW Rules 2014, the Notice in
M.S.No.1 of 2006 was superseded, and therefore holds no legal validity
or operative force. The Rules are purposefully silent regarding any
provision for crossover from Master (NCV) to Master (FG) because no
such route is recognised or permitted under the international maritime
framework. Mere silence in the Rules does not create a legal vaccum, it
is the way it is so as to be onsistent with international maritime standards.
10.Moreover, the petitioners have the option to follow the
procedure laid down in Part BB of Section II/17 of TEAP Manual, Part A
(Annex-I). Accordingly, upon obtaining certification as First Mate for FG
vessels limited to 3000 GT and thereafter joining an FG vessel as
management level officer, the petitioners can very well progress towards
the rank of Master (FG) in accordance with the prescribed competency
and experience requirements. Further the role of a Master (FG) vessel
carries significant responsibilities, including international navigation,
crew management and strict compliance with safety and operational
standards under international law. Therefore, certification for such a
position cannot be granted loosely or as a matter of right. It must be
earned through demonstrable compliance with the prescribed competency
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
criteria. Therefore, the petitioners cannot seek a direction for a regulatory
change or relaxation of qualification standards, as such a request would
amount to a misuse of extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court.
11.As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate
General, the Notice in M.S.No.1 of 2006 has been cancelled and
superseded by the STCW Rules 2014. These Rules, being aligned with
the STCW convention, constitute the prevailing legal regime governing
seafarers' certification in India. As per the said Rules, there is no
provision for cross over from Master (NCV) to Master (FG), as such a
cross over is not recognised under either the STCW convention or the
Indian maritime regulatory framework. Hence, the silence of the Rules in
this regard is deliberate and reflects a considered policy position that
aligns with global maritime safety standards. Therefore, such silence
cannot be interpreted as a gap or deficiency giving rise to any enforceable
right.
12.With regard to the issuance of a writ of mandamus, the learned
Additional Advocate General relied upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India reported in (2017) 7 SCC 221 in the case of
Mangalam Organics Limited V. Union of India, wherein it was held that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
directing the Government to issue Rule would amount to take a policy
decision in a particular manner, which is impermissible. If a public
authority is foisted with any duty to do an act and fails to discharge that
function, mandamus can be issued to the said authority to perform its
duty. Therefore, no Court can direct the legislature to enact a particular
law. Hence, the law regarding the power of the writ court to issue a
mandate to the Legislature to legislate is well settled. No Constitutional
Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing the Legislature to enact a
law on a particular subject in a particular manner. Further, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India held that the High Court, while exercising
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot usurp
the functions of the executive and compel it to exercise its rule-making
power in a manner directed by the Court. Such directions are
impermissible and contrary to the doctrine of separation of powers
envisaged under the Constitution. Therefore, the High Court, by a writ of
mandamus or otherwise, cannot direct the State Government to enact
rules on a particular subject.
13.The above judgments are squarely applicable to the case on
hand and the directions sought for in this writ petition cannot be
considered. The implementation of STCW Rules 2014 together with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
Notice in M.S.No.1 of 2006 cannot be possible, since the Notice in
M.S.No.1 of 2006 has been superseded by the STCW Rules 2014.
Hence, the request made by the petitioners was rightly rejected by the
order impugned in W.P.No.36121 of 2023.
14.In view of the above, both the writ petitions are devoid of merits
and are liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, both the Writ Petitions stand
dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
26.11.2025
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non Speaking order
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
Lpp
To
1. The Secretary,
Union of India,
Ministry of Port, Shipping and Waterways,
No.1, Parliament Street,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2. The Director General of Shipping,
Beta Buildings, 9th Floor,
i-think Techno Campus,
Kanjur Marg (East), Mumbai – 400 042.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
3. The Nautical Surveyor-cum-Deputy Director General (Tech.),
Having Office at Director General of Shipping,
Beta Buildings, 9th Floor,
i-think Techno Campus,
Kanjur Marg (East),
Mumbai – 400 042.
4. The Registrar,
Indian Maritime University,
ECR, Uthandi, Kanathur,
Chennai – 600 119.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 and 9887 of 2025
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,
Lpp
order in
W.P.Nos.36121 of 2023 & 9887 of 2025
and
W.M.P.Nos. 36081 of 2023 & 11135 of 2025
26.11.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/12/2025 03:54:12 pm )
