IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an appeal in terms of Section 11 of the High Court of the Provinces (Special Provinces) Act No. 19 of 1990 read with Article 154P (6) of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

Nalani Danawathi Wijethilaka, Keppitiyagoda Olinna Road, CA No. CA/PHC/0015/2021 Nagoda, S.P. Galle Galle.

HC WRT/No. 29/16 PETITIONER v.

1. Registrar and the Commissioner of the Corporative Development Department of the Southern Province, No. 147/3, Pettigalawatta Road, Galle.

2. Simarahitha Keppitiyagoda Kantha Naya Ganudenu Pilibada Samupakara Samithiya, Keppitiyagoda, Nagoda.

3. Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General’s Department, Colombo.

RESPONDENTS AND NOW BETWEEN

1. Nalani Danawathi Wijethilaka, Keppitiyagoda Olinna Road, Nagoda, Galle.

PETITIONER-APPELLANT v.

1. Registrar and the Commissioner of the Corporative Development Department of the Southern Province, No. 147/3, Pettigalawatta Road, Galle.

2. Simarahitha Keppitiyagoda Kantha Naya Ganudenu Pilibada Samupakara Samithiya, Keppitiyagoda, Nagoda.

3. Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General’s Department, Colombo.

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

M. Ahsan. R. Marikar J.

COUNSEL : S. N. Vijith Singh with Chithrananda Liyanage for the Petitioner - Appellant.

Navodi de Zoysa, S.C. for the

1st and 3rd Respondent-Respondents.

ARGUED ON : 26.08.2024 WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS : 01.09.2022 (By the Appellant)

The Respondent did not submit.

DECIDED ON : 11.10.2024 M. Sampath K. B. Wijeratne J.

Introduction The Petitioner-Appellant (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellant’) was an employee of the 2^nd Respondent-Respondent, ‘Seemasahitha Keppitiyagoda Kantha Naya Ganudenu Pilibada Samupakara Samithiya’ (hereinafter referred to as the ‘2^nd Respondent’). The 1^st Respondent-Respondent is the Registrar and Commissioner of the Co-operative Development Department of the Southern Province (hereinafter referred to as the ‘1^st Respondent’).

Factual background A dispute arose between the Appellant and the 2^nd Respondent concerning an alleged misappropriation of funds totaling Rs. 2,170,499.34, which the 1^st Respondent referred to arbitration. Following an inquiry, the arbitrator issued an award under Section 59 of the Co-operative Societies Law No. 5 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Co-operative Societies Law'), ordering the Appellant to pay the 2^nd Respondent Rs. 10,66,38.44, along with Rs. 25,800.00

in litigation costs, amounting to a total of Rs. 1,32,438.34. Additionally, a 16%

annual interest was imposed until the full amount is paid.

The Appellant, dissatisfied with the award, appealed to the 1^st Respondent under Section 38(2) of the Co-operative Societies Law.

The 1^st Respondent, acting under Rule 49(xii)(b) of the Co-operative Societies Rules, made pursuant to Section 61 of the Co-operative Societies Law and published in Extraordinary Gazette No. 93/5 dated 10^th January 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rule'), rejected the appeal on the ground that the Appellant had failed to make the required appeal deposit as stipulated by Rule 49(xii)(a).

The aggrieved Appellant sought a Writ of certiorari to quash the letter dated 2^nd December 2015, through which the 1^st Respondent, the Registrar and Commissioner of the Co-operative Development Department of the Southern Province, dismissed the Appellant's appeal. Additionally, the Appellant sought a Writ of mandamus directing the 1^st Respondent to acknowledge the appeal.

The learned High Court Judge of the Southern Province, holden at Galle, after considering the Appellant's Petition, the Respondents' objections, the submitted documents, and the parties' submissions, dismissed the Appellant's Writ application in the impugned order dated 29^th January 2021.

The Appellant subsequently appealed to this Court against that decision.

In addition, the Appellant filed a Revision application as well, challenging the same order.

At the argument on 15^t