IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application for a Writ of Mandamus under Article 140 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

Sulochana Constructions (Pvt) Ltd., Jambugasmulla Road, Nugegoda.

C.A. Case No. WRT-0575/21 PETITIONER Vs

1. Janatha Estate Development Board, No. 55/15, Vauxhall Street, Colombo 02.

2. Buwanaka D. Abeysuriya, Chairman, Janatha Estate Development Board, No. 55/15, Vauxhall Street, Colombo 02.

(Ceased to Hold Office) 3. Udith K. Jayasinghe, Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Govijana Mandiraya, Battaramulla.

3a. B. L. A. J. Dharmakeerthi, Secretary, Ministry of Plantation Industries, 8th Floor, Sethsiripaya, Stage II, Battaramulla.

4. Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General’s Department, Colombo 12.

RESPONDENTS BEFORE : M. T. MOHAMMED LAFFAR, J WICKUM A. KALUARACHCHI, J COUNSEL : P. K. Prince Perera for the Petitioner.

Rasika Dissanayake for the 1st and 2nd Respondents.

Madhushka Kannangara, SC, for the 3a and 4^th Respondents.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS TENDERED ON : 16.10.2023 (On behalf of the Petitioner)

09.11.2023 (On behalf of the 1st and 2nd Respondents)

DECIDED ON : 08.12.2023 WICKUM A. KALUARACHCHI, J.

The facts relating to this application are as follows: In January 2018, the Cabinet of Ministers had taken a policy decision to implement a restructuring program and decided to lease out lands belonging to state institutions to small and medium-scale investors. The 1^st respondent, Janatha Estate Development Board (hereinafter referred to as “JEDB”) had called for applications from private companies to develop a land belonging to the 1^st respondent by the advertisement published in the “Daily News newspaper dated 24.05.2019, marked P-5. The petitioner stated that Mount Jean Estate Watawala is an estate that belonged to the 1st respondent and was under the restructuring program. The petitioner has submitted a project proposal in respect of Mount Jean Estate. Thereafter, the interview board of JEDB conveyed its preliminary acceptance of the proposal forwarded by the petitioner by the letter dated 2019.07.31, marked P-7. By the same letter, the petitioner was informed to express the agreement to comply with the conditions attached to the letter P-7. It is stated further in the letter P-7 that upon the agreement to comply with the conditions, the JEDB can enter into a contract with the petitioner after a feasibility review of the project report. Accordingly, the petitioner confirmed the agreement to the said conditions.

The petitioner states that after submitting confirmation for their conditions, the 2nd respondent directed the superintendent of the Mount Jean Estate by the letter P-9 to show the land that could be given for the special project. Thereafter, the Managing Director of the petitioner showed the said land to be surveyed, prepared a map for 8 blocks, and submitted it to the 2^nd respondent.

However, the petitioner states that the 1^st to 3^rd respondents have taken no steps so far to enter into an agreement with the petitioner, and the 1^st to 3^rd respondents are going to enter into contracts with some other persons in respect of the surveyed 8 blocks of land of the Mount Jean Estate. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner was that the 1st to 3rd respondents were bound to enter into a contract with the petitioner. Also, the learned Counsel contended that the petitioner had been denied its legitimate expectations due to the failure of the 1^st to 3^rd respondents to enter into a contract. This is the reason why the petitioner company has come before this court seeking a Writ of Mandamus against the respondents to enter into a contract with the petitioner company regarding the 08 blocks of land described in the prayer (b) of the petition. The position taken up in the statement of objections of the 1^st and 2^nd respondents was that the 2^nd respondent communicated only the preliminary approval for the project propos