IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Application under Article 140 of the Constitution for a mandate in the nature of Writ of Mandamus.

JF Tours & Travels (Ceylon) (Pvt.) Ltd, No. 189, Bauddhaloka Mawatha, Colombo 04.

PETITIONER Vs.

Court of Appeal Case No:

CA/WRIT/23/25

1. J.I.D. Jayasundara, General Manager, Sri Lanka Railways, Sri Lanka Railways Headquarters, Olcott Mawatha, Colombo 10.

2. W.D. Ranjith Pathmalal, Deputy General Manager (Commercial), Sri Lanka Railways, Sri Lanka Railways Headquarters, Olcott Mawatha, Colombo 10.

3. N.J. Indipolage, Deputy General Manager (Transportation), Sri Lanka Railways, Sri Lanka Railways Headquarters, Olcott Mawatha, Colombo 10.

4. Chief Engineer, Sri Lanka Railways, Sri Lanka Railways Headquarters, Olcott Mawatha, Colombo 10.

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

RESPONDENTS Before: Mayadunne Corea, J Mahen Gopallawa, J Counsel: Theekshana Pathirana instructed by Dilhara Arachchige for the Petitioner.

M . Amerasinghe, SSC for the Respondents.

Supported on: 06.02.2025 Decided on: 28.03.2025 Mayadunne Corea J The Petitioner seeks the following reliefs.

“(d) Grant an order in the nature of a writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st Respondent, and/or one or more of the 2^nd – 4^th Respondent’s acting under the 1^st Respondent to honor the terms of P4 in particular with regard to the requests [in the form of an advance notice] of the Petitioner, under and in terms of P4 viz. Clause 5 read with Clause 9, to provide Viceroy Special [coaches with steam engine i.e. Loco213 B2B, Loco 215 B1A and Loco 340 B1D] in good running order and running condition;

(e) Grant an Order in the nature of a writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st Respondent, and/or one or more of the 2^nd – 4^th Respondent’s acting under the 1^st Respondent to honor the terms of P4 in particular with regard to the requests [in the form of an advance notice] of the Petitioner, under and in terms of P4 viz. Clause 5 read with Clause 9, to provide Viceroy Special [coaches with diesel engines] in good order and running condition;”

The facts of the Petitioner’s case are as briefly as follows. The Petitioner company is a tour operator and launched the Viceroy Special luxury steam train service (herein referred to the Viceroy Special) which is the subject matter of this Application. The Petitioner submits that the Viceroy Special was in uninterrupted operation for a period of 38 years from 1986 until 2024. For the use of the train the Petitioner and the 1^st Respondent had entered into a contract. The Petitioner and the 1^st Respondent from time to time renewed the contract and it was a part of the conditions that, “a. The Petitioner shall meet the full cost of reconditioning, renovating and air conditioning of Viceroy Special and the routine maintained of the interior of the carriages.

…

e. 1^st Respondent shall provide Viceroy Special in good order and running condition when so requested by the Petitioner by the Petitioner, subject to sufficient notice given prior to each journey, as per the terms of the Agreement in force [i.e. 10 days] Viz. Clause 5 read with Clause 9 of P4;

f. payment relevant for each journey shall be per the invoice forwarded by the 1^st Respondent, calculated in terms of the provisions of the relevant Agreement in force, all of which had been to date settled by the Petitioner, as and when intimated;”

The parties entered into an Agreement to renew the Viceroy Special contract on 08.11.2023, which is valid from 08.11.2023 through 07.11.2028. The Petitioner states that during the operation of the Viceroy Special in 2024, payments to the 1^st Respondent were settled in a timely manner. The Petitioner notified the 1^st Respondent of the necessity to operate 3 round trips of the Viceroy Special but the 1^st Respondent in breach of the contract has failed to supply the steam train. Hence, this Application.

The Petitioner’s case The Petitioner contends that the failure to