SALAHUDEEN

vs.

SRI LANKAN AIRLINES LTD AND OTHERS

COURT OF APPEAL
OBEYESEKERE, J.
CA/WRIT/99/2012
JUNE 28, 2019

Writs of certiorari and mandamus-Article 140 of the Constitution Jurisdiction-Private contract-Training programme for Cadet Pilots

The petitioner, a licensed commercial pilot, secured a place as a trainee cadet pilot at the 1st respondent airline company. Accordingly, the petitioner had entered into an agreement with the 1st respondent. A segment of the training programme consisted of a simulator training in which candidates were usually sent abroad to complete. Prior to the petitioner being sent abroad, a simulator was installed in Sri Lanka and the petitioner was requested to conduct the aforementioned training locally. The petitioner contended that the simulator had many technical issues from the date of installation and on the day of his final full flight simulator evaluation, the simulator malfunctioned, after which the 1st respondent terminated the training of the petitioner on the basis that the petitioner had failed to achieve the expected standards of the company. The petitioner sought a re-evaluation but the 1st respondent denied the request. The petitioner filed this action to quash the decision of the 1st respondent to terminate the petitioner's cadet pilot training and to direct the 1st-3rd respondents to provide the petitioner with a second attempt in the final full flight evaluation.

Held:

1. The writ jurisdiction conferred on the Court of Appeal is limited inter alia to an examination of the legality of a decision of a body exercising a public or statutory function. This jurisdiction cannot be extended to examine rights and obligations arising from a private contract, even If the act that is being challenged is that of a statutory authority, unless there is a statutory flavour to the act that is being impugned.

2. The relationship between the petitioner and the 1st respondent company is solely based on the agreement for training of cadet

pilots and the conduct of the 1st respondent that is complained of arises out of this agreement. The issue has arisen out of a contract and therefore does not fall within the scope of the writ jurisdiction conferred by Article 140.

Cases referred to:

1. Galle Flour Milling (Pvt) Limited v. Board of Investment of Sri Lanka and another (2002) BLR 10 at 11-12
2. Gawarammana v. Tea Research Board and others [2003] 3 Sri LR 120 at 124
3. De Alwis v. Sri Lanka Telecom and others [1995] 2 Sri LR 38 at 41
4. Chandradasa v. Wijeratne [1982] 1 Sri LR 412 at 416
5. Siva Kumar v. Director General, Samurdhi Authority of Sri Lanka and another [2007)1 Sri LR 96
6. M.P.A.U.S. Fernando and others v. Timberlake International (Pvt) Limited (SC/APPEAL/06/2008, SC Minutes 20.03.2010)
7. Ratnayake and others v. C.D. Perera and others [1982] 2 Sri LR 451
8. Jayawardena v. People's Bank [2002) 3 Sri LR 17

APPLICATION for Writs of Certiorari and Mandamus.

Faisz Musthapha, P.C., with Senany Dayaratne and Nisala Fernando for the Petitioner.

Sanjeeva Jayawardena, P.C., with Rajeev Amarasuriya and Lakmini Warusevithana for the 1st-3rd and 5th Respondents.

cur. adv. vult.

September 23, 2019

OBEYESEKERE, J.

When this matter was taken up for argument on 5th December 2018, the learned President's Counsel for the parties moved that this Court pronounce its judgment on the written submissions that would be tendered on behalf of the parties.

The Petitioner has filed this application seeking inter alia the following relief from this Court:

1. A Writ of Certiorari to quash the decision of the 1st Respondent, Sri Lankan Airlines Limited, to terminate the Petitioner's Cadet Pilot Training, which decision is reflected in the documents annexed to the petition marked P24 and P29;

2. A Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st-3rd Respondents to afford the Petitioner a second attempt in the Final Full Flight Simulator Evaluation.

The facts of this matter very brie