IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application for the issuance of mandates in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and Prohibition in terms of Article 140 of the Constitution.

Kudage Yasanthi Jayasekera No. 97/17D Jakotuwa, Welewatte, Wellampitiya.

Deceased Petitioner CA (Writ) No. 04-2020 Vidanalage Premarathna No. 97/17D Jakotuwa, Welewatte, Wellampitiya.

Substituted Petitioner Vs.

1. Land Reform Commission No. 475, Kaduwela Road, Battaramulla.

2. Hon. Attorney General Attorney General’s Department Colombo 12.

Respondents Before : Hon. M Sampath K. B Wijeratne,J.(CA)

: Hon. M. Ahsan R. Marikar, J.(CA)

Counsel : Padma Bandara P. C with Samurdhi Fernandopulle instructed by Widyanandage Pasidu Prabath for the Petitioner.

Kaushalya Nawaratne, P.C with Sandun Sanjeewa instructed by NW Associates for the 1^st Respondent.

Written Submissions : Petitioner filed on 07.12.2023.

1st Respondent-Respondent filed on

08.01.2024.

Argued on : 09.07.2024 Decided on : 13.09.2024 M. Ahsan R. Marikar, J. (CA)

Introduction

1) The Petitioner had instituted this action to invoke the Writ Jurisdiction of this court to obtain the reliefs prayed for in the prayer of the petition dated 13^th January 2020.

2) The reliefs sought by the Petitioner against the Respondents are as follows;

a) To issue notice on the 1st and 2nd Respondents above named;

b) To issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st Respondent to grant a deed of transfer in favour of the Petitioner in respect of the portion of land reserved for the Petitioner which is morefully described in the schedule below;

c) To issue a Writ of Prohibition restraining the 1^st Respondent from making arrangements to draw new survey plans and separate several lots from and out of the land which has been already reserved for the Petitioner;

d) To grant cost and;

e) To grant such other and further relief as to your Lordships court shall seems meet.

Facts of the case

3) The Petitioner had instituted this action to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st Respondent to grant a deed of transfer in favour of the Petitioner in respect of the property which is described in the schedule to the petition.

4) The crux of this case is the father of the Petitioner had served as the caretaker of a land known as Jakotuwawatta, which is in extent of 22 acres located in Wellampitiya.

5) The aforesaid land originally belonged to a company named J.L.D Peiris Company. In recognition of the Petitioner’s father’s service as a caretaker, the said company had promised to grant 4 acres from the aforesaid land to the Petitioner’s father.

6) Subsequently, the said portion was granted to the Petitioner’s father who then independently possessed the said 4 acres of land.

7) Following his demise, the Petitioner’s mother K.A Lusihamy, along with her children, including the Petitioner, continued to occupy the said land.

8) On or around the year 1975 the entire main land was vested with the 1^st Respondent. Thereafter, the Petitioner’s mother had preferred a claim to the 1^st Respondent to divest the portion occupied by her family.

9) In response, the Land Reform Commission had decided to grant 5 separate portions of the said land to K.A Lusihamy and her children.

10) After complying with the Land Reform Commission procedures to obtain the valuation in respect of the separate lots, the relevant charges, including handling charges, legal fees, and the appraised value, were deposited by K.A Lusihamy and her children.

11) Despite fulfilling these financial obligations, the Land Reform Commission had failed to issue the deeds. Thus, K.A Lusihamy had appealed to the Prime Minister and the relevant authorities. However, the Land Reform Commission has yet to issue the deeds since 1975.

12) K.A Lusihamy’s family had been paying the assessment tax for the said property to the Kotikawatte Mulleriyawa Pradeshiya Sabha and the Petitioner had been registered as a voter from this location.

13) The Petitioner’s mother, K.A Lusihamy passe