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

CA/Writ/406/2023 Kawsaladevi Govindapillai Klassic Apartments, No. 287/8/2, Modera Street, Colombo 15. PETITIONER Vs.

1. W.A.D.S. Gunasinghe, General Manager, General Managers Office, Sri Lanka Railways, Colombo 10.

1A. J.I.D. Jayasundara, General Manager, General Manager’s office Sri Lanka Railways, Colombo 10.

2. W.D.R. Pathmalal, Assistant Commercial Superintendent (Land), Railway reserve management Unit, General manager’s Office Sri Lanka Railways, Colombo 10.

3. P.P.D.S. Muthukumarana, Government Chief Valuer, Valuation House, No. 748, Maradana Road, Colombo 10.

3A. A.S.W.K. Nanayakkara, Government Chief Valuer, Valuation House, No 748, Maradana Road, Colombo 10.

4. The Hon. Attorney General, Attorney Generals Department, Colombo 12.

RESPONDENTS Before : Hon. M.T. Mohammed Laffar, J.(Act.P/CA)

: Hon. K. Priyantha Fernando, J.(CA)

Counsel : Faiszer Musthapha, PC with Naveen Marapana for the Petitioner.

Dilantha Sampath, SC for the State.

Supported On : 14.05.2025 Decided on : 16.06.2025 K. Priyantha Fernando, J. (CA)

The Petitioner currently operates a small restaurant and a salon on the premises described in the schedule to the Petition. The land on which the building stands belongs to the State and is under the purview of the Sri Lanka Railways. The Petitioner’s husband rebuilt the current structure on the land after the previous building was destroyed by fire in 1991. The Petitioner states that she has consistently paid rent as per the law.

On 2nd October 1997, the Petitioner entered into a lease agreement with the former manager of Railways for the premises, with the rent assessed at Rs. 172,800. Subsequently, the Railways tried to increase the rent to Rs. 422,200, which led to case No. 9318/RE in the District Court of Colombo. This matter was eventually settled, and the Petitioner agreed to pay an annual rent of Rs. 209,088 for the period from 1st July 2007 to 30th June 2012.

Following the expiration of this period, the Petitioner and the then General Manager of Railways entered into a new lease agreement bearing No. 00001/2012. Under this agreement, the annual rent was assessed at Rs. 313,620 for a period of five years commencing from 1st July 2012, representing a 50% increase from the previously agreed rent in case No. 9318/RE. The lease also provided that the rent was subject to amendment following a valuation by the government valuer.

The Petitioner paid the agreed rent for the first year of this new lease, from 1st July 2012 until 30th June 2013. However, the Sri Lanka Railways unilaterally and arbitrarily revised the rent, including retrospectively for the period already paid, first to Rs. 720,000, then to Rs. 900,000, and finally to Rs. 800,000. These substantial increases far exceeded the maximum 50%

increment allowed under Section 217(2)(vi) of the Land Manual The Petitioner contends that the conduct of the Railways was unlawful and designed to evict her from the premises and reallocate the land to other parties. The Petitioner emphasizes that Section 217(2)(vi) of the Land Manual stipulates a maximum limit of 50% increase from the previously assessed rent, thereby safeguarding the rights of tenants and ensuring proportional and gradual increments in rent.

The Respondents submit that they reserve the right to respond more fully to the Petition and Affidavit of the Petitioner if Notices are issued. As a preliminary objection, the Respondents contend that the Petition is misconceived in law, involves a purely contractual grievance, and does not satisfy the conditions for the issuance of a writ of mandamus. They argue that the Application amounts to an abuse of Court process, is barred by Res Judicata, and that the Petitioner has failed to make a f