Judgment D.G. Karnik, J. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Advocate General for Respondent nos. 1 to 3. None present for Respondent no.4, Union of India. We have also heard learned Counsel for Madgavkar Salvage, who has filed an intervention application bearing Misc. Civil Application No. 471/2010. 2. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith. 3. Respondent no.5 as well as the applicant in Misc. Civil Application no. 471/2010 submitted that they would submit to the orders of the Court. 4. Since we made it clear that in this Petition we are not concerned with the manner of removal of the vessel, Mr. David D' Souza, who claims that he is appearing in public interest, also stated that he has nothing to add to what was submitted by the appearing parties. 5. By this Petition, the Petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other order or direction to the Respondents to forthwith take action for the removal of the vessel “M. V. River Princess” (hereinafter referred to as “the ship”) grounded off the Candolim-Sinquerim shore, within a specified time. The Petitioner also prays for a mandamus forthwith to initiate immediate measures for the protection of Candolim-Sinquerim shoreline and to check the erosion occurring therein on account of the grounded ship. 6. The facts leading to the Petition briefly stated are : The ship arrived in the port of Goa sometime in September, 1998 or thereabout. It appears that the ship drifted away from the port area and got embedded in the sand, near Sinquerim beach, Candolim, sometime in June, 2000 or thereabout. Since then, the ship is lying grounded in the sands at the same place. Though nearly ten years have passed, no steps have been taken by the owners of the ship or by the Government for its removal from the coastal waters. The Petitioners, who are residents of Candolim beach, have therefore filed this Petition for a direction to the Respondents to remove the ship. According to them, the presence of the ship is causing erosion of the beach and irretrievable damage to the beach. 7. The Petitioners, who are residents of Candolim beach, have therefore filed this Petition for a direction to the Respondents to remove the ship. According to them, the presence of the ship is causing erosion of the beach and irretrievable damage to the beach. 7. The Petitioners have filed an affidavit of Verner da Costa Frias, dated 31.08.2010, annexing thereto a copy of the letter written by the Government of India and Ministry of Earth Sciences to the Collector, North Goa, as also a copy of the report of the expert team from the Ministry, annexed to the said letter. The report by the expert team of the Ministry of Earth Sciences is in pursuance of its visit to the site of grounded ship on 19th and 20th July, 2010. The Petitioner has also filed on record a copy of the letter dated 12.01.2009, written by the Chief Engineer, (WRD) & Ex-Officio, Addl. Secretary, Government of Goa, to the Director, Department of Science, Technology & Environment, Goa. The letter states thus : “It is once again to bring to your kind attention that the grounded vessel is acting like a spur or groyne. Since it is slightly inclined to the coast line, there is a deposition one side and erosion on the other. In case the grounded vessel will not be removed, the measures like submerged reefs have to be provided along with other beach management measures to protect the coast line and also remedy to the extensive damage caused to the shore alongside. However, if the grounded vessel is removed, the process would change and some restoration would occur and measures have to be initiated accordingly which would be different from the measures adopted in case the grounded vessel was not removed. Hence, in light of above, it is implored that the decision to remove/not to remove the M.V. River Princess may be communicated to this Department so that necessary measures could be evolved at the earliest.” 8. The Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the ship is causing irreparable ecological damage to the submerged reefs along the beach. It is necessary that the ship be removed forthwith so as to prevent further damage to the coast line which has eroded on account of the grounded ship. Reports appearing in several newspapers pointing out the ecological damage are also annexed to the Petition. 9. It is necessary that the ship be removed forthwith so as to prevent further damage to the coast line which has eroded on account of the grounded ship. Reports appearing in several newspapers pointing out the ecological damage are also annexed to the Petition. 9. Learned Advocate General, appearing for Respondents, states that he does not dispute that the ship is causing ecological damage to the ship. He also submitted that the Government wants to take steps for the removal of the vessel and has already initiated a process for the removal of the ship. In short, he supported the case of the Petitioner that the ship needs to be removed at the earliest. The intervenors present also supported the case of the Petitioner by submitting that the continued presence of the ship would cause a continued damage to the shore line as also the beach. 10. The report of the senior team of Ministry of Earth Sciences attached to the letter of the Government of India dated 26.07.2010, also discloses that it is necessary that the ship should be removed forthwith. The report, inter alia, states “that the mid ship of the internal structure has been damaged extensively. Due to mid ship buckling, the transverse frame of the deck are likely to give away with extension of buckling to the other side. Due to severe monsoon and continuous hammering of waves, it is likely that the mid ship buckling along with deck may increase further.” The report finally states that any further delay in removal of the ship might lead to further weakening of the super structure, bulkheads, stiffners, etc., due to constant pounding of waves and forced movement of water that may result in collapse of the ship in many places and that could be immediate serious concern to the beach users in terms of their safety and could be an environmental hazard. The report finally states that removal of the ship by suitable means would have to be undertaken on priority without further delay. 11. There appears to be a consensus amongst the residents in the locality as also the experts that continued presence of the ship grounded off the Sinquerim beach, is an environmental hazard and the ship needs to be removed urgently. No dissenting voice has been heard from anybody. 11. There appears to be a consensus amongst the residents in the locality as also the experts that continued presence of the ship grounded off the Sinquerim beach, is an environmental hazard and the ship needs to be removed urgently. No dissenting voice has been heard from anybody. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the direction needs to be issued to the State of Goa to remove the ship forthwith. 12. Some arguments were sought to be addressed on the manner of removal of the ship. There is no material on record as to the manner in which the ship can be best removed. Since it is a matter of expert opinion as to the manner of removal of the ship in the absence of appropriate materials before us, it would not be possible to entertain any arguments in that regard in this Petition. It is open to the State Government to decide about the manner of removal and modality thereof. The decision, if any, could be subject to judicial scrutiny, if challenged by anybody. 13. Hence, we passthe following : The Petition is allowed. The Respondent no.1 and its Officers are directed to take appropriate measures for removal of the grounded vessel M. V. River Princess. The work shall commence within two months from today and shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and, in any event, before the onset of the next monsoon. As regards the beach preservation, measures suggested by the Government in the affidavit dated 24.08.2010, the same shall be complied with. In view of the fact that the Writ Petition has been finally disposed of, no further orders are necessary on the intervention applications. All the intervention applications stand disposed of. Rule made absolute in the above terms.