MSC Elsa 3 Sinkage: Kerala High Court Asks Centre If Navy Can Be Deployed To Assess Environmental Impact Of Wreckage On Seabed

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (July 14) asked the Centre to consider whether the Indian Navy's expertise can be deployed to explore the wreckage lying in the seabed following the sinkage of MSC Elsa 3 ship and to determine its present status.

The Liberian-flagged vessel had sunk off the coast of Kerala on May 25, 2025, raising concerns regarding environmental degradation, adverse effects to marine life and navigational safety issues.

The Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar noted that the report of the Amicus Curiae had mentioned that the Indian Navy also possesses demonstrable deep-diving ROV (Remote Operated Vehicle) and salvage expertise.

It also noted that the report stated that the same had repeatedly conducted complex salvage and pollution response operations. Moreover, the Navy has commissioned INS Nistar, which is an indigenously designed Diving Support Vessel specifically meant for deep sea diving, rescue and salvage operations, it was stated.

It then asked the Additional Solicitor General of India (ASGI) to get instructions from the Ministry of Defence regarding deployment of the same for the purpose of ascertaining the adverse impacts caused due to the wreckage.

"The learned ASG shall get instructions from the 2nd respondent [Ministry of Defence] as to whether the services of the Navy can be employed to ascertain as to whether any wreck lying on the seabed poses any environmental risks," the Court said.

The Court was considering a batch of public interest litigations raising questions regarding the navigational hazards, marine pollution and livelihood issues of coastal communities posed with the sinkage of vessel.

Last time, the Court had directed the Union government to submit a detailed action plan to tackle the issues highlighted by it with respect to the wreckage caused by MSC Elsa 3 ship.

During earlier proceedings, the Court had noted that there were reports submitted by the maritime agencies and surveyors engaged by the shipping company (Mediterranean Shipping Company - MSC) and that as per these reports, the wreck would not pose any environmental or navigational threats.

However, the Directorate General of Shipping as well as the Court was of the opinion that these reports alone cannot be relied upon and an independent study must be conducted to see whether the afore findings were correct with respect to environmental hazards, navigational safety issues, etc. Earlier, the Court was told that the National Institute of Oceanography (NIO) had undertaken a study to determine the environmental impact of the wreckage.

Today, the Court was informed that the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MOEFCC), Director General of Shipping and other central agencies had convened a meeting to deliberate upon the environmental issues pointed out in the earlier interim order. The ASGI also told that they were awaiting a report by the NIO, which is expected by July 30, and based on the same, a field study can be conducted, if necessary.

However, the Court was of the view that someone must inspect the wreck lying on the seabed:

"We just want to know whether it has the machinery to go inside, dive deep down and ascertain and tell us. Has somebody done that? Has somebody gone inside and whether they have ascertained the damage?"

It then went on to highlight the reported damages on containers based on the reports by the agencies engaged by MSC. It was noted that one of the containers with IMDG material (International Maritime Dangerous Goods) is the most dangerous one. It was also found that 11 containers with calcium carbide are inside the wreck itself and that container with plastic nurdles is reportedly secured but the same is not seen. It further noted that the said container is likely to hold about 25-28 metric tonnes of pellets and it is not known whether the doors have been secured.

However, the ASGI stressed that what type of study needs to be undertaken by the Centre is to be determined by the report submitted by the NIO, which is likely to come out within 2 weeks.

The Court then observed that the study undertaken by the NIO may not be sufficient:

"Having considered the submissions advanced by the ASGI, and as we have not seen the directions issued by the NIO, which appears to be to conduct an environmental damage assessment, and long-term study to assess the extent of environmental damage caused by the MSC ship wreck, we are of the view that the said report may not be sufficient to controvert or to ascertain as to whether the report prepared by...consultants can be accepted. We have no doubt in our mind that as noted, an independent expert agency or a scientific consultant should be engaged to verify the findings contained in the reports relied on by the 12th respondent [ship owner]."

The case is now posted to August 11 for further consideration. The Court has also directed that independent counter affidavits shall be filed by the respondents.

Case Title: T. N. Prathapan v. Union of India and Ors. and connected cases

Case No: WP(PIL) 50/ 2025 and connected cases

Counsel for the petitioners: V. Harish, C.R. Rekhesh Sharma, Rajan Vishnuraj, Anil Thomas (T), K.V. Rashmi, Lakshmi, Rahul Anil, K. Jayesh Mohankumar, Pushparajan Kodoth, Vandana Menon, Vimal Vijay, Dona Mathew

Counsel for the respondents: Santhosh Mathew (Sr.), Amitava Majumdar, Pranoy K. Kottaram, P. Sreekumar - ASGI, T. Naveen - KSPCB