2023 Supreme(SRI)(CA) 464
COURT OF APPEAL
Hon. Dhammika Ganepola J
Kuruwitage Don Marlin Minura Siriwardena – Appellant
Versus
Ceylon Petroleum Corporation and others - – Respondent
CA/Writ 64/2021
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of application, under and in terms of Article 140 of the Constitution for mandates in the nature of Writs of Certiorari and Prohibition.
Kuruwitage Don Marlin Minura Siriwardena No. 50 1/1, Ambatale, Mulleriyawa New Town.
Case No: CA/Writ 64/2021 PETITIONER Vs.
1. Ceylon Petroleum Corporation No. 609, Dr. Danister De Silva Mawatha, Colombo 09.
2. W. W. D. Sumith Wijesinghe Chairman and Board Member, Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, No. 609, Dr. Danister De Silva Mawatha, Colombo 09.
3. Buddhika Ruwan Madihahewa Managing Director and Board Member, Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, No. 609, Dr. Danister De Silva Mawatha, Colombo 09.
4. R. M. D. K. Rathnayake Director, Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, No. 609, Dr. Danister De Silva Mawatha, Colombo 09.
5. Tharindu Hashan Eknathgedara Director, Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, No. 609, Dr. Danister De Silva Mawatha, Colombo 09.
6. Chaminda Hettiarachchi Director, Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, No. 609, Dr. Danister De Silva Mawatha, Colombo 09.
7. Buddhika Iddamalgoda Director, Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, No. 609, Dr. Danister De Silva Mawatha, Colombo 09.
8. Thilanga Nadeera Polwatta Director, Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, No. 609, Dr. Danister De Silva Mawatha, Colombo 09.
9. Hon. Udaya Prabath Gammanpila Minister of Energy, Minister’s Office, Ministry of Energy, No. 80, Sir Earnest de Silva Mawatha, Colombo 07.
9A. Hon. Kanchana Wijesekera Minister of Power, Ministry of Power, No. 437, Galle Road, Colombo 3.
10. B. S. Cooray No. 1/215, Udumulla, Mulleriyawa.
RESPONDENTS Before : Sobhitha Rajakaruna, J.
Dhammika Ganepola, J.
Counsel: : Shanaka Amarasinghe with Shaveen Perera for the Petitioner.
Nayomi Kahawita, S. C. for the 1St to 4th and 6th to 9th Respondents.
Ashan Stanislaus for the 10th Respondent. Argued On : 21.10.2022.
Written Submission : Tendered on behalf of the Petitioner 11.07.2023 Tendered on behalf of the 10th Respondent 22.08 .2023 Decided On : 05.09.2023.
Dhammika Ganepola, J.
The Petitioner operates a filling station at No.50 1/1, Ambatale, Mulleriyawa New Town under the dealership agreement[P1b] with the 1st Respondent. Said dealership agreement runs from November 2015 to 26 July 2032. The Petitioner states that he has made a substantial investment and purchased appreciable volumes of petroleum products from the 1st Respondent Corporation under the said dealership agreement. On or about 22 October 2020, the Petitioner had come to know that the construction of a new filling station has begun at No.330, Sedawatta, Ambetale Road and No. 339-340, Orugodawatta, Ambetale Road, which together constitute one premises owned by the 10th Respondent. Said premises is said to be located 459 meters away from the Petitioner’s filling station. The Petitioner further states that he verily believes that the 10th Respondent has been given or is imminent to be given a dealership by the 1st Respondent to operate a filling station at the said premises. It is claimed that unless the 10th Respondent has been informed that the Board of Directors of the 1st Respondent has decided to grant written approval to the 10th Respondent to operate such a filling station, the 10th Respondent would not have begun the construction of the said filling station.
The Petitioner claims that based on the following reasons any such approval by the Board of Directors of the 1st Petitioner Corporation to permit the 10th Respondent to sell, supply or distribute petroleum products or enter into any dealership agreement with the 10th Respondent is illegal, unreasonable, and is in gross violation of the Petitioners legitimate expectations and rule of Law:
• As a general practice, the 1st Respondent Corporation does not grant a dealership if the filling station is to be set up within a 3 km radius of a filling station of an existing station except in exceptional circumstances which cannot be established in the instant case;
• The Petitioner faces the danger o