S. U. B. Karalliyadde, J.

The argument of this matter has been concluded before His Lordships Justice M. T. Mohammed Laffar (ACT. P/CA) and me, and the Judgment was reserved by Justice Mohammed Laffar. Nevertheless, by the date of the judgment, Justice Mohammed Laffar had retired. With the consent of all parties, I deliver this judgment as a single- bench judgment.

The Petitioners in this Application are land owners of a portion of land called ‘Berawakandawatta’ that is the subject matter of this Application (Lot 1 in extent of 0.239 Hectares in the Preliminary Plan No. ක1977 marked as P46). The Petitioners state that they became the owners of the said land by virtue of deeds marked as P9, P10, P20, P32 and P39. The 2^nd to 5^th Petitioners were served with quit notices on 25.02.2025 under Section 3 of the State Lands (Recovery of Possession) Act, No. 7 of 1977 (as amended), to vacate the land in question and hand over the possession to the National Water Supply and Drainage Board (6^th Respondent). Thereafter, to recover the possession of the land, an application under Section 5 of the State Lands (Recovery of Possession) Act was made against the 2^nd to 5^th Respondents in the Magistrate’s Court of Kaluthara (P49A to P49D).

The Petitioners later became aware that a notice under Section 2 of the Land Acquisition Act, No. 09 of 1950 (as amended) (the Act) had been published on 22.10.1979 (marked as P43). Thereafter, the then Minister of Lands and Land Development had made a declaration under Section 5 of the Land Acquisition Act published in the Gazette Extraordinary bearing No. 195/10 dated 01.06.1982 marked as P44C that the land called Berawakandawatta assessment No. 71 in the extent of 2 Roods and 21.8 Perches will be acquired for a public purpose. The Assistant Government Agent of Kalutara had thereafter published a notice under Section 7(1) of the Land Acquisition Act in the Gazette Extraordinary bearing No. 273/3 dated 28.11.1983 marked as P45 stating that any person who has a right or interest to make claims for compensation for the land depicted in the plan marked P46 that will be acquired for a public purpose. The said land has been vested with the 6^th Respondent by virtue of a certificate issued under Section 44 of the Act dated 15.09.1994 marked as P47 and registered in the Kalutara Land Registry (P48).

The grievance of the Petitioners is that, when they acquired title to the relevant plot of land by deeds marked as P9, P10, P20, P32 and P39, they searched the Land Registry folios but did not reveal that the said lands had been acquired by the State. The Petitioners contend that the documents marked as P43, P44C and P45 issued under the Land Acquisition Act do not indicate the nature of the public purpose for which the land is intended to be acquired, nor has any compensation been made to the Petitioners or their predecessors for such acquisition. Furthermore, no improvements have been made to that land after its acquisition by the State. The Petitioners further argue that, under Section 39A(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, the Minister can make a divesting order in respect of the said land and therefore the Petitioners made a request (P58) to the Minister to make a divesting order in favour of the Petitioners, but did not receive a reply until the date of filing this Application. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid factors, the Petitioners have invoked the Writ jurisdiction of this Court, seeking the following substantive reliefs, inter alia,

(c) Grant and issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st Respondent to make an order under Section 39A (1) of the Land Acquisition Act No. 9 of 1950 as amended, to divest the land claimed by the 1^st Petitioner as morefully described in the schedule to Deed of Gift bearing No. 2162 dated 15/03/1995 marked P-9, to the 1^st Petitioner;

(d) In the alternative to prayer (c), grant and issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st and/or 3^rd and/or 5^th Respondents to compensate the 1^st Petitioner acco