Seafarers Too Have Right To Live With Dignity: Orissa High Court Directs Centre To Repatriate Foreign Crew Of Abandoned Vessel

The Orissa High Court has recently ordered repatriation of 23 foreign crew members of an abandoned cargo vessel, which has been anchored at the Paradip Port since May this year upon issuance of arrest orders by the Court for keeping security in maritime suit. [2026 LiveLaw (Ori) 116]

While providing relief in the writ petition filed by the Master of the Vessel, the Bench of Justice Radha Krishna Pattanaik held that the abandoned seafarers have right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which includes right to life in a humane and healthy environment. Fixing responsibility of the Union in such a situation, the Judge said–

“Necessary provisions are in place under the Act to deal with such a situation where a vessel is abandoned for the stated reasons including when the maritime claims are made and pending clearance/settlement. Such is one of the contingencies when the ship is declared as an abandoned vessel in view of Section 3(2)(e) thereof. On a reading of the Convention to which India is a signatory having officially ratified the same and as a Member State is bound to comply with the statutory obligation as enumerated thereunder.”

The cargo vessel 'MT Unity' reached at the Paradip Port on May 11, 2026 and on the same day, the High Court passed order for its arrest as security to the maritime claim in an admiralty suit. Since then, the vessel along with its crew members is at the port. Initially, the vessel remained berthed at port and thereafter, upon completion of its discharge, was shifted to the anchorage.

The petitioner, who is the Master of the Vessel, filed this writ petition seeking repatriation of the onboard crew, and also for replacement of the vessel's crew as per Section 92 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 2025 ('the Act'). He also sought permission for the vessel to enter inside the port berth/lay-up berth/ mooring or any other safe point for sludge removal and safe accommodation during adverse weather condition.

It was intimated to the Court that despite of repeated e-mails, the owners have not made any arrangement for the replacement of the crew and the contracts of the petitioner along with other present crew members are already over. It was submitted that the crew members are suffering due to shortage of essentials, including food and water. Therefore, it was sought that India being a signatory and ratifier to the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, it is bound to comply with the obligations prescribed therein.

After hearing the parties, the Court took note of the provision under Section 3(2)(d) of the Act which says that a vessel can be deemed to be an “abandoned vessel” if its owner fails to fulfil the obligations under the Act towards ensuring safety, security, prevention of pollution or welfare of seafarers and whose insurer, salvor or contractor fails to satisfy such obligations within such reasonable time as may be specified by the Government of India.

Similarly, as per Section 3(2)(e), a vessel can be held to be abandoned if it is restrained by any Court or public authority in India, in respect of which, the public authority or the person assigned responsibility by the Court to fulfil the shipowner's obligations under the Act fails to deliver.

“In so far as, the case at hand is concerned, according to the Court, not only the Owner has failed to discharge the statutory obligations but also the vessel has been detained by the orders of this Court in Admiralty Suits and hence, according to Section 3(2)(d) and (e) of the Act, the vessel has become an 'abandoned vessel' and the crew members are its abandoned Seafarers defined under Section 3(1) thereof,” the Court held.

Justice Pattanaik, referring to Section 311 of the Act, stressed on the responsibility of the Central Government in respect of an abandoned vessel. He highlighted that the Union Government can direct the Port Authority or State Maritime Board or any other authority or agency to take measures in respect of any abandoned vessel which is abandoned on or near the coast of India or within the coastal waters that is aimed at ensuring safety, security and preventing the abandoned vessel from posing a threat to life or property or environment, including protection of India's coastline.

Further, relying upon the jurisprudence settled by a catena of judgments including in Louis De Raedt v. Union of India & Ors. (1991), the Court opined that the seafarers of an abandoned ship have right to life guaranteed under Article 21, notwithstanding their nationality. Further citing Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Court said that right to life does not itself mean a mere animal existence but a right to live with dignity, which cannot be without humane and healthy environment.

Accordingly, it ordered the Union as well as other authorities to immediately arrange for repatriation of the crew, necessarily with replacement thereof, and to realize the expenses incurred while accomplishing it from the owner or its agents, whosoever is liable to indemnify, as maritime claim.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. V.J. Mathew, Senior Advocate

Counsel for the Opposite Parties: Mr. P.K. Parhi, DSGI for the Union; Mr. A.P. Das for the Port