Back
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 Writs of Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus.
1. Ven. Buddama Nandasara Thero, Sirinandanaramaya, Monaragala.
2. Kadirawel Shashikumar, Muppaneweliwatta, Monaragala.
3. Sugathapala Siriwardena Disanayake, Prajashalawa Road, Monaragala.
PETITIONERS Vs.
Court of Appeal Case No:
CA/WRIT/202/2024
1. M.J. Gunasiri, Commissioner General of Excise, Excise Department, Kotte Road, Rajagiriya.
1(A). U.L. Udaya Kumara Perera, Commissioner General of Excise, Excise Department, Kotte Road, Rajagiriya.
2. K. Dharamseelan, Deputy Commissioner General of Excise (Revenue and Operation), Excise Department, Kotte Road, Rajagiriya.
2(A). M.J. De Silva, (Acting), Deputy Commissioner General of Excise (Revenue and License), Excise Department, Kotte Road, Rajagiriya.
3. S. Ranjan, Assistant Commissioner of Excise, Excise Department, Uva Province, Badulla.
3(A). A.M.G. Adikari, Assistant Commissioner of Excise, Excise Department, Uva Province, Badulla.
4. T.M.B. Tilakarathna, Superintendent of Excise, Excise Department, Monaragala.
4(A). R.A.L. Ramanayake, Superintendent of Excise, Excise Department, Monaragala.
5. T.P. Gamage, Officer in Charge, Excise Centre, Monaragala.
6. Dayananda Ranwala, Excise Inspector, Excise Centre, Monaragala.
6(A). E.W.A.C. Ediriweera, Excise Inspector, Excise Centre, Monaragala.
7. W.D.P.C. Samarasekara, Divisional Secretary, Divisional Secretariat, Monaragala.
8. K.M.N. Jayawardena, Senior Superintendent of Surveyor, Surveyor General’s Office, Monaragala.
9. Lanka Sathosa Limited, CWE Secretariat Building, Vauxhall Street, Colombo 02.
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 Writs of Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus.
1. Ven. Buddama Nandasara Thero, Sirinandanaramaya, Monaragala.
2. Kadirawel Shashikumar, Muppaneweliwatta, Monaragala.
3. Sugathapala Siriwardena Disanayake, Prajashalawa Road, Monaragala.
PETITIONERS Vs.
Court of Appeal Case No:
CA/WRIT/202/2024
1. M.J. Gunasiri, Commissioner General of Excise, Excise Department, Kotte Road, Rajagiriya.
1(A). U.L. Udaya Kumara Perera, Commissioner General of Excise, Excise Department, Kotte Road, Rajagiriya.
2. K. Dharamseelan, Deputy Commissioner General of Excise (Revenue and Operation), Excise Department, Kotte Road, Rajagiriya.
2(A). M.J. De Silva, (Acting), Deputy Commissioner General of Excise (Revenue and License), Excise Department, Kotte Road, Rajagiriya.
3. S. Ranjan, Assistant Commissioner of Excise, Excise Department, Uva Province, Badulla.
3(A). A.M.G. Adikari, Assistant Commissioner of Excise, Excise Department, Uva Province, Badulla.
4. T.M.B. Tilakarathna, Superintendent of Excise, Excise Department, Monaragala.
4(A). R.A.L. Ramanayake, Superintendent of Excise, Excise Department, Monaragala.
5. T.P. Gamage, Officer in Charge, Excise Centre, Monaragala.
6. Dayananda Ranwala, Excise Inspector, Excise Centre, Monaragala.
6(A). E.W.A.C. Ediriweera, Excise Inspector, Excise Centre, Monaragala.
7. W.D.P.C. Samarasekara, Divisional Secretary, Divisional Secretariat, Monaragala.
8. K.M.N. Jayawardena, Senior Superintendent of Surveyor, Surveyor General’s Office, Monaragala.
9. Lanka Sathosa Limited, CWE Secretariat Building, Vauxhall Street, Colombo 02.
RESPONDENTS Before: Mayadunne Corea, J Mahen Gopallawa, J Counsel: Saman Liyanage with Krishan Elpitiya instructed by Optima law Associates for the Petitioners. Optima Law Associates for the Petitioners.
Prabhashanee Jayasekara, S.C. for the 1st to 8th Respondents. Shantha Jayawardena with Hirannya Damunupola and Tharuka Ranathunga for the 9th Respondent. Supported on: 10.09.2025 Decided on: 24.10.2025
Mayadunne Corea, J.
The Petitioner seeks, inter alia, the following reliefs:
“b) Grant and issue a mandate in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari quashing the decision of the 01st to 08th Respondents to grant a liquor license to 09th Respondent to run a liquor shop in the Sathosa building in question or to renew the liquor license of the 09th Respondent to run a liquor shop in the said Sathosa building in question as contained in the document marked P30.
c) Grant and issue a mandate in the nature of a Writ of Prohibition preventing the 01st to 08th Respondents from issuing and or renewing a liquor license to the 09th Respondent periodically to run a liquor shop in the said Sathosa building in question.
d) Grant and issue a mandate in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the 01st to 08th Respondents to hold a proper and impartial inquiry into the complaints and objections made by the Petitioners against the issuing or renewing of the liquor license to the 09th Respondent to run a liquor shop in the said Sathosa building in question.”
The facts of the case briefly are as follows. The 9th Respondent had made an application to the 1st Respondent to obtain a liquor license on 23.04.2021. The 9th Respondent is currently running a liquor shop at one of its branches in Monaragala on a liquor license issued by the 1st to 8th Respondents. The Petitioners allege that the Monaragala branch of the 9th Respondent is situated in close proximity to religious places of worship and schools in the area as follows:
| Place of worship/school | Distance in meters |
| Temple including a sacred Bo-tree (a branch of the sacred Jaya Sri Maha Bodhi) and a Buddha statue | 74.70 |
| Muslim Mosque | 129.23 |
| Ganadevi Kovil | 320 |
| Sambodhi Viharaya | 370.60 |
| Mahanama Central College | 423 |
| Bukkeeriyagolla Rajamaha Viharaya | 493 |
| St. Anthony’s Church | 806.40 |
The Petitioners state that the Petitioners, religious leaders, and the general public had opposed the issuance of a liquor license to the 9th Respondent due to the building being situated in close proximity to places of worship and schools, as this would be in contravention of the guidelines and conditions set out under the Extraordinary Gazette Notification No. 1544/17 dated 10.04.2008 which is also known as Excise Notification No. 902. Despite this, the 1st to 8th Respondents had issued a liquor license to the 9th Respondent. Thereafter, the Petitioners had filed a Fundamental Rights Application bearing No. SC/FR/303/2021 in the Supreme Court, which the Petitioners then withdrew as the Respondents decided against issuing a liquor license to the 9th Respondent.
Nevertheless, the 9th Respondent was issued a liquor license in 2023 on a subsequent survey plan approved by the 8th Respondent. The Petitioners state that the 1st to 8th Respondents have issued the license on the initial application preferred by the 9th Respondent without calling for a new application and that such conduct/action/decision is bad in law.
The Petitioners’ contention
The Petitioners challenged the acts of the Respondents on the following grounds:
• The Respondents have acted contrary to Extraordinary Gazette Notification No. 1544/17 dated 10.04.2008 by acting in violation of the minimum distance rule, by not conducting a proper inquiry to ascertain public opinion, and by issuing liquor licenses above the maximum limit prescribed to one entity.
• The Respondents have acted contrary to the undertaking in the Fundamental Rights Application before the Supreme Court in SC/FR/303/2021.
• The survey plan approved by the 8th Respondent does not indicate the correct distances.
The Respondents’ contention
The 1st to 8th Respondents raised the following objections:
• A report was called from the Government Superintendent of Surveys to ascertain the actual distances under Rule 13(h) of Excise Notification No. 902.
• An inquiry was held with regard to the public complaints received against the application of the 9th Respondent.
• The Petitioners have wilfully misrepresented or suppressed material facts
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
