GEETHIKA AND TWO OTHERS V. DISSANAYAKA AND FIVE OTHERS

GEETHIKA AND TWO OTHERS V. DISSANAYAKA AND FIVE
OTHERS

SUPREME COURT
MARSOOF.J.
EKANAYAKA, J .
SURESH CHANDRA J.
S.C.F.R APPLICATION NO. 35/2011
MAY 31ST , 2011

Constitution - Infringement of fundamental rights -Article 12[1] - Right to equality - Article 126 - Fundamental rights jurisdiction and its exercise

The Petitioners made an application in terms of Article 126 or the Constitution for the alleged violation of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 12( 1) of the Constitution as a consequence. of the 3rd Petitioner not being selected for admission to Grade 1 of D. S. Senanayake College.

The application for admission fur the year 2011 had been submitted under the category of 'children of the residents at close proximity to the school.'  The main thrust of the Petitioners' application was that on the basis of residence,they are entitled to have their child (3rd Petitioner) admitted to the school.

Held:

1. A consideration of Clause 6.1 of the Circular No. 2010/21 dated 31.5.20I0 shows that the main consideration for selection of children under the category of "children of those who arc residing close to the school" would he the Applicant's place of residence.

Per Suresh Chandra, J.

" .. interview panels should consider all the documents that are submitted by a prospective applicant and assess them carefully and see whether the cumulative effect of such documents would establish the genuine residence of such applicant."

2, The interview panel failed to evaluate the documents that were submitted by the Petitioners in support of their application to admit the child to the school and appear to have acted arbitrarilv,  The panel appears to have consider the concept of residence in a very abstract manner and has failed to consider the totality of the documents that were submitted which clearly establish the residence or the Petitioners,

3, Petitioners have established the fact of violation of their fundamental rights in terms of Article 12(1) of the Constitution,

Cases referred to -

Haputhantirige and others v. Attorney General - (2007) 1 Sri L.R. 101

APPLICATION made in terms of Article 126 of the Constitution

Kanishka Witharana for Petitioners

Ms. Barrie, State Counsel for the Attorney General

Cur.adv.vult.

July 12th 2011

SURESH CHANDRA J.

    The Petitioners made an application in terms of Article 126 of the Constitution for the alleged violation of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 12(1) of the Constitution as a consequence of the 3rd Petitioner not being selected for admission to Grade 1 of D, S, Senanayake College,

    The Petitioners in their application have stated that the 1st and 2nd Petitioners are the parents of the 3rd Petitioner for whose admission to D. S. Senanayake College they made an application for the year 2011, The application had been

submitted under the category of "Children of the residents at close proximity to the School" which category is dealt with under Clauses 6.1 (I-IV) of the circular No. 2010/21 dated  31.5.2010 issued by the Ministry of Education regarding admission of children to Grade 1 of Government Schools marked P5. The Petitioners stated that they submitted documents P8 to P17 along with their application and tendered documents marked PI9A to P19T at the interview held on 7th September 2010 and that they were informed by the Panel who held the interview that they had received 57 marks. They were surprised to see that the name of the 3rd Petitioner was not in the list of children selected for admission which was displayed by the school. The 1st Petitioner had submitted an appeal in terms of the said circular and had given further grounds to substantiate her entitlement to have her child selected to the said School. Thereafter the 1st Petitioner had been required to attend an inquiry before the Appeals Board and she had submitted a further document (P2

Click Here to Read the rest of this document