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

2024 Supreme(SRI)(CA) 236

COURT OF APPEAL
Hon. M. Sampath K. B. Wijeratne J.
S.G Joseph Santiago – Appellant
Versus
K. Uthayarajah The Divisional Secretary The Divisional Secretariat Vavuniya and others – Respondent
CA/Writ/0016/2019



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 and Mandamus in terms of Article 140 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

1. S.G Joseph Santiago, No. 09, Bandaranayaka Mawatha, Ratnapura.

PETITIONER CA No. CA/Writ/0016/2019 v.

1. K. Uthayarajah, The Divisional Secretary, The Divisional Secretariat, Vavuniya.

1A. N. Kamalathasan, The Divisional Secretary, The Divisional Secretariat, Vavuniya.

2. I. M. Haneefa, The District Secretary, The District Secretariat, Vavuniya.

2A. S. M. Saman Bandulasena The District Secretary, The District Secretariat, Vavuniya.

3. P. Kuganathan, Provincial Land Commissioner, Department of Provincial land Commissioner, Northern-Provincial Council, No. 80, Kandy Road, Chundukkuli, Jaffna.

3A. A. Sothinathan, Provincial Land Commissioner, Department of Provincial Land Commissioner, Northen-Provincial Council, No. 59, Temple Road, Jaffna.

4. R. M. C. B. Herath, Commissioner General of Land, Land Commissioner General ‘s Department, “Mihikathamadura”, No: 1200/6, Rajamalwatte Road, Battaramulla.

5. Joseph Selliah Thevetheepan, No. 208, Main Road, Kovilkulam, Vavuniya.

6. Thoondil Kandasamy, No. 202, Thanalaxmi Stores, Kovilkulam, Vavuniya.

7. Milar Fatima Rani, Nee Selliah Fatima, No. 10, Old Kaccheriya Road, Ratnapura.

8. Thyageshwaran Thushanthi, Vishnu Kovil Road, Kovilkulam, Vavuniya.

9. Kandasamy Thayalan, C/O T. Kandasamy, No. 202, Thanalaxmi Stores, Kovilkulam, Vavuniya.

10.Kandasamy Tharshika, C/O T. Kandasamy, No. 202, Thanalaxmi Stores, Kovilkulam, Vavuniya.

11.N. Lasitha, ‘Sampath Enterprise’, No. 208, Main Road, Kovilkulam, Vavuniya.

12.Jeruratnam Nesan, No. 128, Kovilputhukkulam, Vavuniya.

13.Thuraisingham Sarojinidevi, No. 267, Kovilkulam, Vavuniya.

14.Innasi Vincent Siriya Pushpam, Alaiadi Street, Kovilkulam, Vavuniya.

RESPONDENTS BEFORE : M. Sampath K. B. Wijeratne J. &

M. Ahsan. R. Marikar J.

COUNSEL : Shantha Jayawardena with Azra Basheer for the Petitioner.

N. Kahawita, S.C. for 1st – 4th Respondents.

Harindi Seneviratne for the 5th to 10th and

13th Respondents.

B. N. Thambo with K. Jackson for the 12th Respondent.

ARGUED ON : 27.02.2024 DECIDED ON : 03.05.2024 M. Sampath K. B. Wijeratne J.

Introduction The Petitioner instituted these proceedings seeking inter-alia, writ of certiorari;

i. To quash the decision to appoint/recognise/accept the 5th Respondent as the successor to the Grant ‘P 2’, reflected in ‘P 20’, [The minutes of meeting marked ‘P 20’.]

ii. To quash the decision to issue long term leases to the 5th and 7th to 10th Respondents in respect of the land alienated on the annual Permit, [contained in minutes marked ‘P 20’.]

iii. To quash the document marked ‘P 20’.

iv. To quash the letter marked ‘P 13’.

Writ of mandamus;

i. Directing the 1st to 4th Respondents to appoint/recognise the Petitioner as the successor to the Grant ‘P 2’.

ii. Directing the 1st to 4th Respondents to issue lease or other legal means to the surviving children of Joseph Selliah in respect of the land alienated on the annual Permit.

Without prejudiced to the above, a writ of mandamus directing the 1st to 4th Respondents to hold an appropriate inquiry/hearing to determine the entitlement of the land alienated on the annual Permit.

The 1st Respondent; 7th to 10th Respondents and the 12th Respondent filed their objections seeking to dismiss the Petitioner’s application.

In reply, the Petitioner filed a counter affidavit.

Upon closure of pleadings, the matter was fixed for argument and the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the learned State Counsel for the 1st to 4th Respondents, the learned Counsel for the 5th to 10th and 13th Respondents and the learned Counsel for the 12th Respondent made their submissions.

Factual background The Petitioner asserts that his family hails from Ratnapura. The 5th, 7th, and 14th Respondents are siblings of the Petitioner. According to the Petitioner, in the early 1970s, the ent

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