SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(SRI)(CA) 324

COURT OF APPEAL
Hon. K.M.G.H. Kulatunga J.
National Council for Disaster Management and other – Appellant
Versus
Hon. Minister of Labour Labour Secretariat and others – Respondent
CA/ WRT/0654/23



IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application for Mandates in the nature of Writs of Certiorari under and in terms of Article 140 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

C.A. CASE NO. WRT/0654/23

1. National Council for Disaster Management, Vidya Mawatha, Colombo 07.

2. Major General Herath Mudiyanselage Udaya Herath (Retd), Director General, Disaster Management Centre, Vidya Mawatha, Colombo 07.

PETITIONERS Vs.

1. Hon. Minister of Labour, Labour Secretariat, Colombo 05.

2. Commissioner General of Labour, Department of Labour, Colombo 05.

3. Mr. Kanchana Silva, (Arbitrator), Janahiru, No. 129/B, Anagarika Dharmapala Mawatha, Kandy.

4. Mr. W.J.M.D. Nawaratne, No. A/1/39, Perahera Mawatha, Kollupitiya, Colombo 03.

RESPONDENTS BEFORE : K.M.G.H. KULATUNGA, J.

COUNSEL : Sumendra Fernando, instructed by Anil Danasuriya, for the Petitioners.

Isuru Lakpura, instructed by K. K. Nilushika Lashani Welagedara, for the 4th Respondent.

Pulina Jayasooriya, SC, for the State.

ARGUED ON : 25.08.2025 WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON: 08.09.2025 DECIDED ON : 18.09.2025

JUDGEMENT

K.M.G.H. KULATUNGA, J.

1. The 4th respondent was employed by the 1st petitioner, the National Council for Disaster Management, on a contractual basis, as the Assistant Director (Emergency Operations) of the Disaster Management Centre, on 24.04.2008, and then was made permanent in that capacity on 01.07.2011.

2. The 4th respondent was nominated, with another, to participate at a seminar held in Honolulu, Hawaii, from the 9th of February to the 15th of March, 2017. Upon the 4th respondent proceeding to the USA to participate in the said seminar, he was provided with accommodation. Upon arrival, in view of a certain incident, on a complaint of a female employee, the 4th respondent had been arrested by the Honolulu Police, and criminal action had been filed in a Court for harassment.

Thereafter, the 4th respondent had been enlarged on bail.

3. The prosecuting attorney of the District Court of the First Circuit of the Honolulu Division, State of Hawaii, had notified the Disaster Management Centre of the complaint, according to which the charge is as follows:

“On or about February 08th, 2017 in the city and county of Honolulu, State of Hawaii, WEERASINGHE NAWARATNE, also known as Mudiyanselage Dammika Nawaratne Weerasinghe Jayathilaka, with intent to harass, annoy, or alarm any other person, did strike, shove, kick, or otherwise touch other person in an offensive manner and/or subject the other person to offensive physical contact, thereby committing the offence of harassment, in violation of Section 711-1106 (1) (a) of the Hawaii Revised Statutes.

Dated at Honolulu, Hawaii: February 10th 2017”

4. Upon this incident and the events that followed, the 4th respondent has returned to Sri Lanka, and upon instructions received from the Ministry of Disaster Management, the 2nd petitioner Director General, has caused the interdiction of the 4th respondent. Thereafter, a domestic inquiry had been conducted in terms of the Establishments Code, and the 4th respondent’s services had been terminated. The said termination was preceded by a due finding of the inquiring officer that the allegation was established. The said inquiring officer has also obtained the details of the incident in Hawaii through the Sri Lankan Embassy in the USA. Upon obtaining this information, the same had been brought to the notice of the 4th respondent who had not responded. The said inquiry has proceeded on thirteen charges/allegations. During the course of the arguments, the main contention was whether the matter of termination could be referred to arbitration under Section 4(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, No. 43 of 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the “IDA”), as amended.

5. After the argument was concluded, both parties tendered their post-

argument written submissions. According to the written submissions filed on behalf of the 4th respondent the iss

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top