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

2023 Supreme(SRI)(SC) 20832

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an appeal under the provisions of Article 128(2) of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

SC Appeal No: 52/2020 SC Special LA No: 263/19 CA Writ Application No: 157/2016 1. Weragoda Kapuge Priyantha, “Agra”, Pahala Karannagoda, Warakagoda.

2. Hewage Don Ananda, Sri Sarananda Road, Pahala Naragala, Gowinna.

3. Lalith Samantha Wijesinghe, 179/01, Pannil Kandha, Kananwila, Horana.

4. Kurukulasooriya Oswal Chanditha Mario Fernando, No. 77, Kirigala Road, Handapangoda.

PETITIONERS vs

1. Secretary, Ministry of Education, “Isurupaya”, Sri Jayawardenapura, Battaramulla, Kotte.

2. Upali Marasinghe, Former Secretary, Ministry of Education, “Isurupaya”, Sri Jayawardenapura, Battaramulla, Kotte.

3. P.D. Jayarathne, Principal, Ashoka College, Horana.

4. Ven. Opalle Gnanasiri Nayaka Thero, Rajamaha Viharaya, Horana.

5. Vidyarathna (incorporated) Society, Rajamaha Viharaya, Horana.

6. P.D. Jayarathne, Principal, Ashoka College, Horana.

7. Commissioner General of Examinations, Ministry of Education, Pelawatta, Battaramulla.

RESPONDENTS And now between

1. Secretary, Ministry of Education, “Isurupaya”, Sri Jayawardenapura, Battaramulla, Kotte.

7. Commissioner General of Examinations, Ministry of Education, Pelawatta, Battaramulla.

1ST & 7TH RESPONDENTS – APPELLANTS vs

1. Weragoda Kapuge Priyantha, “Agra”, Pahala Karannagoda, Warakagoda.

2. Hewage Don Ananda, Sri Sarananda Road, Pahala Naragala, Gowinna.

3. Lalith Samantha Wijesinghe, 179/01, Pannil Kandha, Kananwila, Horana.

4. Kurukulasooriya Oswal Chanditha Mario Fernando No. 77, Kirigala Road, Handapangoda.

PETITIONERS – RESPONDENTS

2. Upali Marasinghe, Former Secretary, Ministry of Education, “Isurupaya”, Sri Jayawardenapura, Battaramulla, Kotte.

3. P.D. Jayarathne, Principal, Ashoka College, Horana.

4. Ven. Opalle Gnanasiri Nayaka Thero, Rajamaha Viharaya, Horana.

4A. Ven. Dr. Labugama Naradha Thero, Rajamaha Viharaya, Horana.

5. Vidyarathna (incorporated) Society, Rajamaha Viharaya, Horana.

6. P.D. Jayarathne, Principal, Ashoka College, Horana.

2ND – 4TH, 4A, 5TH & 6TH RESPONDENTS – RESPONDENTS Before: L.T.B. Dehideniya, J Achala Wengappuli, J Arjuna Obeyesekere, J Counsel: Sureka Ahmed, Senior State Counsel for the 1st and 7th Respondents –

Appellants Dr. Sunil Coorey with Sudharshani Coorey for the 1st – 4th Petitioners –

Respondents J.A.J. Udawatte with Anuradha Ponnamperuma for the 4A and 5th Respondents – Respondents Argued on: 5th November 2021 Written Tendered on behalf of the 1st and 7th Respondents – Appellants on 27th Submissions: August 2020 Tendered on behalf of the 1st – 4th Petitioners – Respondents on 20th October 2020 Tendered on behalf of the 4A and 5th Respondents – Respondents on 7th August 2020 Decided on: 13th January 2023 Obeyesekere, J This appeal has been preferred against the judgment of the Court of Appeal which quashed the direction given by the Ministry of Education to the Horana Asoka College [the School] to refrain from conducting classes solely in the English language and to adopt the bilingual policy of the Government.

Background facts By letter dated 2nd September 2015 [P12], the Secretary, Ministry of Education who is the 1st Respondent – Appellant [the 1st Appellant], informed the 4th Respondent – Respondent [the 4th Respondent] who at that time was the Manager of the said School that:

(a) Section 6 of the Assisted Schools and Training Colleges (Special Provisions) Act, No.

5 of 1960 [the 1960 Act] requires all ‘Government approved unaided private Schools’

to comply with the general education policy of the Government; and (b) the said School, by conducting classes solely in the English medium from Grades 1 to 11 is acting contrary to the education policy of the Government on the medium of instruction that should be adopted by schools.

Furthermore, by P12, the 1st Appellant directed the 4th Respondent to adopt the bilingual policy of the Government of teaching part of the s

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