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

Jeyakumar Rajeswaran, D7, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

Petitioner C.A.Writ No.497/2022 Vs

01. B. Jeyaharan, Divisional Secretary, Divisional Secretariat, Karaichchi, Kilinochchi. 02. A. Sothirathnan, Provincial Land Commissioner, No.59, Temple Road, Jaffna.

03. K.D. Bandula Jayasinghe, The Commissioner General, No.1200/06, Meekatha Madhura, Rajamalwatte Road, Battaramulla.

04. Karhigesu Neethirasa, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

05. S. Singharasa, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

06. S. Pararajasingham, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

07. Mathew Tenhnsone Dharshiya, Periya Paranthan,Kilinochchi.

08. S. Sanmuganaatha, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

09. K. Buwaneshwari, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

10. S. Sivasubramaniam, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

11. A. Anusiyadevi, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

12. T. Idaparooban, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

13. M. Maheswari, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

14. K. Palanivel, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

15. M. Yogeswari, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

16. S. Ragunathan, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

17. P. Paitharaskaralingam, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

18. Y. Erambamoorthi, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

19. S. Krishnamoorthi, Periya Paranthan, Kilinochchi.

20. The Attorney-General, Attorney-General’s Department, Hulftsdorp, Colombo 12.

Respondents Before : N. Bandula Karunarthna, J. (P/CA)

M.Ahsan R.Marikar, J.

Counsel : D.P.L.A. Kashyapa Perera for the Petitioner.

Samanthi Dunuwila, SC for the Respondents.

Argued on : 28.03.2023 Decided on : 29.05.2023 M. Ahsan R. Marikar, J.

Introduction

1. The Petitioner had filed this application seeking reliefs from this court by invoking the jurisdiction of the Writ of Certiorari and Writ of Mandamus.

2. The Petitioner has sought to issue notices to the Respondents for the reliefs prayed for in the prayer of the amended petition dated 1^st March 2023.

Facts related by the Petitioner

3. This matter was supported by Attorney at Law Kashyapa Perera on 28^th March 2023. The said Attorney contended that the Petitioner’s predecessor was Mr. Hunt and the Petitioner’s father Kumaraswamy Jeykumar possessed the land subject to the petition for more than 60 years.

4. During the period of war, the Petitioner were unable to possess the land and subsequently, after resettlement the Petitioner had come back to the said land in 2010 and had established his business on the said land.

5. The Petitioner had admitted that the Petitioner’s father was the power of attorney holder of Mr. Hunt for the disputed land.

6. After the demise of the Petitioner’s father, the Petitioner had constructed a building on the said land and carried out his business for a long period of time expecting to obtain a permit under the Land Development Ordinance in his name.

7. However, after making several applications to obtain the land on a long term lease from the 1^st Respondent, the 1^st Respondent had given a small portion of the said land to the Petitioner and released the balance to a 3rd party.

8. Further, this had affected the legitimate expectation of the Petitioner to receive the land which the Petitioner was in possession for a long period of time.

Objections raised against the aforesaid application by the State

9. The State Counsel Shevanthi Dunuwilla appeared for the Respondents and brought to the notice of the court that Mr. Hunt had expired in 2002. It is confirmed in paragraph 6 of the amended petition dated 1^st March 2023.

10. The Petitioner’s father had expired in 2009 which has been confirmed by the death certificate marked and produced as X4.

11. On the said grounds it is obvious that the Petitioner did not have any legal status to possess the disputed land.

12. The Petitioner had received notice of eviction as per the letter marked and produced as X15. The