Admission to the legal profession is contingent upon good character, and prior convictions significantly impact eligibility, upheld by the principle of natural justice.

JUDGEMENT

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

1. The petitioner, an LL.B. graduate from the Buckinghamshire New University, has submitted an application to be admitted to the Sri Lanka Law College. The said application is marked P-15 and P-18. The same had been rejected by the Incorporated Council of Legal Education, the 1^st respondent, and the 2^nd respondent, the Principal of the Sri Lanka Law College conveyed the same by email dated 26.09.2024 (vide P-17). The petitioner, by prayer (c), is seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the said decision; by prayer (e), is seeking a writ of mandamus directing the 1st and/or the 2nd respondent to approve the petitioner’s application for admission as an Attorney-at-Law student and by prayer (f) is seeking a mandamus directing the 1^st and/or 2^nd respondent to afford an opportunity to the petitioner to place before the 1^st respondent material to satisfy the said respondents to justify his eligibility. Those being the writs sought, the petitioner, by paragraphs (d) and (g), are also seeking an Order calling for all the minutes of the 1st respondent, in relation to the consideration of the petitioner’s application, and also a direction that the 1^st and/or the 2^nd respondent to file in Court such minutes.

2. Learned Deputy Solicitor General Manohara Jayasinghe appeared for the 1^st and the 5^th respondents. The objections of the said respondents were tendered on 18.03.2025. Thereafter, as directed by Court, the minutes of the meetings held on 27.08.2024 of the 1st respondent, and that of the Board of Studies dated 12.03.2024, were tendered along with a motion dated 03.07.2025, copies of which were made available to the petitioner. The counter affidavit of the petitioner was filed prior to that on 01.04.2025. This was taken up for argument on 05.06.2025, and 07.07.2025. Both parties were permitted to file their post-argument written submissions which the petitioners filed on 06.08.2025 and the respondents filed on 05.08.2025. Accordingly, this judgement is now pronounced.

3. As to the facts; the petitioner, upon obtaining his LL.B., has preferred the application P-15 and P-18 seeking admission to the Sri Lanka Law College. According to the said application, the petitioner has disclosed, under item 8, that he had been charged or convicted for a criminal matter and that the High Court Judge has imposed 01 year’s imprisonment each for offences under Sections 120 and 291B of the Penal Code. The said sentence was suspended for 2 years together with Rs. 1500 State costs, in Case No. HC 2973/2021, so concluded on 26.04.2022. It is common ground that the rejection of the application was in view of the said criminal matter. The original indictment contained a charge under Section 3(3) read with Section 3(1) of the ICCPR Act , No. 56 of 2007, and a second charge under Section 291B of the Penal Code. However, upon the service of this indictment, as the petitioner had agreed to conclude this matter by pleading guilty, the State Counsel had amended the 1^st count and substituted the same with a charge under Section 120 of the Penal Code. The petitioner had then pleaded guilty. The learned High Court Judge upon considering the submissions, had imposed sentences of 01 year’s rigorous imprisonment for each of the counts and also imposed Rs. 1500 State cost for Count No. 1. The respective jail sentences have been suspended for 2 years, acting under 303 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act. The learned High Court Judge has specifically stated that the sentence imposed on the 1^st count will have no effect on his law degree, and then stated that the sentence should not