M. Sampath K. B. Wijeratne J.

Introduction

The Petitioner-Appellant (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellant’) was employed by the 2^nd Respondent, Nawalapitiya Co-operative Society Limited (hereinafter referred to as the ‘2^nd Respondent’), as a manager of an outlet. The 1^st Respondent is the Registrar and Commissioner of Co-operative Development for the Central Province (hereinafter referred to as the ‘1^st Respondent’). The 3^rd Respondent is the Arbitrator appointed by the 1^st Respondent.

Factual background

A dispute arose between the Appellant and the 2^nd Respondent regarding a shortage of goods and cash, including cash advances and interest, amounting to a total of Rs. 1,603,872.96. The Appellant denied any liability, and the 2^nd Respondent referred the dispute to the 1^st Respondent, who then forwarded it to the 3^rd Respondent, the Arbitrator, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘3^rd Respondent’) appointed by the 1^st Respondent. The Arbitrator issued an award under Section 59 of the Co-operative Societies Law No. 5 of 1972, holding that the Appellant must pay Rs. 1,016,916.12 to the 2^nd Respondent, along with 20% interest.

The aggrieved Appellant appealed to the 1^st Respondent under Article 58(3) of the Cooperative Societies Statute No. 10 of 1990 of the Central Provincial Council, as amended by the Cooperative Societies Statute (Amendment) Act No. 4 of 1993, which was published in Extraordinary Gazette No. 751 dated 22^nd January 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Cooperative Societies Statute of the Central Provincial Council’).

The Appellant conceded that he had deposited only Rs. 500/- as the appeal deposit. As a result, the 1^st Respondent, by a letter dated 22^nd February 2012, requested the Appellant to supply the outstanding appeal deposit of Rs. 101,191.61 within fourteen days, by 14^th March 2012. The Appellant failed to comply with this request. Consequently, the 1^st Respondent dismissed the appeal by a letter dated 21^st March 2012, acting under Rule No. 49(xii)(a) of the Co- operative Societies Rules, made pursuant to Section 61 of the Co-operative Societies Law No. 5 of 1972 and published in Extraordinary Gazette No. 93/5 dated 10^th January 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rule'). Article 72(2) of the Cooperative Societies Statute of the Central Provincial Council stipulates that the Rules made under the Co-operative Societies Law No. 5 of 1972 remain applicable until new Rules are made under Article 61, as long as they are not inconsistent with the Central Provincial Council statute.

The Appellant states that the 1^st Respondent proceeded to hear the cross-appeal filed by the 2^nd Respondent regarding the same award, with the Appellant's participation. According to the Appellant, the 1^st Respondent increased the Arbitrator's award by Rs. 545,241.19, raising the total amount due to Rs. 1,562,157.31. The Appellant alleged that the 1^st Respondent's decision was neither just nor equitable.

The Appellant, dissatisfied with the decision of the 1^st Respondent, sought a Writ of certiorari from the High Court of Kandy to quash the 1^st Respondent's decision to dismiss the Appellant’s appeal, contained in the letter dated 21^st March 2012 (marked as ‘පෙ 04’ in the High Court). Additionally, the Appellant sought to quash the 1^st Respondent's decision to allow the 2^nd Respondent’s appeal, contained in the letter dated 6^th August 2012 (marked as ‘පෙ 08’ in the High Court). The Appellant also requested a Writ of mandamus to compel the 1^st Respondent to hear the appeal submitted by the Appellant.

The learned High Court Judge of the Central Province, after considering the Appellant’s Petition, the Respondents' objections, the submitted documents, and the submissions filed by both parties, [Vide journal entries of the High Court record.], dismissed the Appellant’s Writ application in the impugned Order dated 25^th October 2017.

The Appellant subsequently filed an appeal to this Court against that decision.

Analysis

I have already addressed th