1. Heard Mr. B. M. Mangukiya, learned counsel for the appellants.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 11.05.2012 recorded in Special Civil Application No.7020 and cognate matters. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that no order could have been passed against the petitioners of Special Civil Application No.7020 of 2012 and in the submission of learned counsel for the appellant, the order is passed in the Special Civil Application No.7020 of 2012, as if the petitioners are the respondents in the petition. Learned counsel for the appellants also addressed this Court on merits of the matter, however, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellants are not considered on merits by this Court, since, the issues are large open before learned Single Judge.
3. So far observations and directions, including the direction to maintain status-quo is concerned, in my reading, they are based on the statement which was made by learned counsel for the petitioners i.e. appellants, as recorded by learned single Judge in para 2 of the order, which reads as under:
"Shri K.S. Nanavaty, learned counsel appearing for petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 6929 of 2012 and cognate matters and Ms. Bela Prajapati, learned advocate for Mr. Mangukiya in Special Civil Application No. 7020 of 2012 state under the instructions of their respective clients that order of Gujarat Maritime Board dated 29.04.2012 will be obeyed by all of them and all the petitioners will be filing an undertaking to this effect that till the appropriate clearance is obtained from the Ministry of Environment of Government of India or concerned Ministry or Competent Authority and till further orders passed by the court in these matters, no ship breaking activities will be undertaken by any of the petitioners and all the petitioners, their agents and servants will see to it that no activities amounting or relating to ship breaking would be carried out in any way nor would they do anything to pollute environment or endanger marine life. This undertaking shall be filed on or before 15.05.2012. Office is directed to accept these undertaking and place them on record during vacation. Shri Nanavati and Ms. Prajapati, learned advocates request that the matters be kept on 18.06.2012."
Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that, the statement which is stated to have been made by him before the learned Single Judge, in fact was not made by him, and therefore, the directions which are based on the said statement be interfered in this appeal. In my view, this is more a case of review of the order, than a challenge to it, which can be considered by the same Honourable Judge. Propriety demands that, no order be passed in this appeal, at least at this stage.
Learned counsel further submitted that the appellants have made an application before the authorities for permitting them to take out such material from the half broken vessel, the seepage of which may harm the environment, which is also being refused on the ground that this Court has granted status-quo. In this regard it is observed that, if one looks at the order dated 11.05.2012 passed in Special Civil Application No.7020 of 2012, it is clear that taking into consideration the environmental and marine life aspects, the learned Single Judge has made certain observations and given directions. If the request of petitioner as aforesaid is considered, without disturbing status quo qua breaking of ship, it may more serve the spirit and purpose for which the order is passed.
Let this matter be placed before the Division Bench, as per roster, for further consideration, on 12.06.2012.
Direct Service is permitted.
(Paresh Upadhyay, J.) mehul Top