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

2023 Supreme(SRI)(CA) 592

COURT OF APPEAL
Hon. Iddawala – J
Samagitha Ratnaike Imperial Garden Apartments and others – Appellant
Versus
R.P.A. Wimalaweera The Commissioner General of Labour and others – Respondent
CA/WRT/403/2018



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

Samagitha Ratnaike Imperial Garden Apartments, 70, SukhumviSoi 21, Apt 304, Bankok, Thailand.

Application No: CA (Writ)

403/2018 Amal Ratnaike

18730, Nau Avenue, Porter Ranch, CA 91326, United State of America.

Appearing by their lawful Power of Attorney Holder, Malson Padmananda Alwis No. 130/1, Subadrarama Road, Nugegoda.

Petitioners Vs.

1. R.P.A. Wimalaweera The Commissioner General of Labour, Labour Secretariat, Narahenpita, Colombo 05.

2. L.T.G.B. Dharshana Then Deputy Commissioner of Labour, District Labour Office Colombo West, Labour Secretariat, Narahenpita, Colombo 05.

3. Iresha Udayngani Present Deputy Commissioner of Labour, District Labour Office Colombo West, Labour Secretariat, Narahenpita, Colombo 05.

4. Anura Hewawitharana Assistant Commissioner of Labour, District Labour Office Kandy North, No. 111, YatinuwaraVeediya, Kandy.

5. A.H.L.R. Padmini Labour Office, District Labour Office Colombo West, Labour Secretariat, Narahenpita, Colombo 05.

6. P.L.T. Bandula No.14A, First Lane, Wijaya Mawatha, Thalahena, Malabe.

Respondents BEFORE : D. N. Samarakoon J Neil Iddawala J COUNSEL : Kushan de Alwis PC, with Ruwan Dias and Ayendra Wickramasekara for the Petitioners.

Amasara Gajadeera SC for the 1st – 5th Respondents.

Argued on : 06.10.2023 Written Submission on : 2 4 . 1 1 . 2 0 2 3 Decided on : 14.12.2023 Iddawala – J The petitioners through this application seek relief by way of Writ of Certiorari to quash the decision of the 1st and/or 2nd and/or 3rd and/or 4th and/or 5th respondents, manifested in documents marked P5, P7 and P9. The petitioners further pray for a grant of an interim order staying any one or more of the 1st – 5th respondents from initiating proceedings in the Magistrate Court to enforce the aforementioned decision and/or decisions.

The salient facts of the case are as follows. The petitioners are the children of the late Jayananda Rathnaike, who was the owner of the properties set out hereinafter which were managed by the 6th respondent. Both the 1st and 2nd petitioners are presently residing abroad and thereby have instituted this application through their lawful Power-of-Attorney holders.

The petitioners state that on or about 07.05.2015 the 6th respondent preferred a complaint to the 1st respondent (the Commissioner General of Labour) against the 1st petitioner alleging that;

- The 6th respondent was acting as a manager to the estate name Iriyagasthanne at Wattegama and the premises bearing No.17, Fareed Place, Colombo 04 owned by late Jayananda Rathnaike, - Upon the demise of the said Jayananda Rathnaike, the 6th respondent continued to perform the said function of the manager of the said properties under and upon the request of the 1st petitioner, - The 6th respondent was purportedly receiving a salary of Rs. 85,000/-

monthly, - The 6th respondent’s services were allegedly discontinued by the petitioners on or about 30.04.2015.

And thereby through his complaint alleged his entitlement to contributions to have been made to the Employee Provident Fund (EPF) and Employee Trust Fund (ETF) as well as other statutory dues.

The petitioner states that during the inquiry conducted by the 5th respondent (District Labour Office Colombo West) into the aforesaid complaint made by the 6th respondent, the 1st petitioner vehemently objected the said complaint as the 6th respondent never served under the 1st petitioner or the petitioners’ late father, in the capacity of an employee and therefor is not entitled to have contributions to EPF and ETF.

Upon the completion of the said inquiry the matter was fixed for order on 10.05.2016, which was subsequently postponed due to further proceedings required by the 5th respondent. Nevertheless, after over a year the inquiry was finally

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top