1937   Present: Maartensz J.

NUGAWELA v. RATWATTE et al.

 In re APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF Quo warranto

Buddhist Temporalities-Election for the office of Diyawadana Nilame--Requirement to summon a meeting within two months only directory- Extension of time not irregular-Right of person summoned in several capacities to more than one vote-Atamasthana Committee entitled to one vote-Jurisdiction of Court-Ordinance No. 19 of 1931, ss. 7 (2), 9 (1), and 33.

The provision in section 7 (2) of the Buddhist Temporalities Ordinance that when a vacancy occurs in the office of Diyawadana Nilame the Public Trustee shall within two months of such occurrence summon a meeting to- fill the vacancy is merely directory and a meeting held after such period is not invalid.

Where a person summoned to such a meeting is present in more than one capacity he" is entitled to one vote only. The Atamasthana Committee which is the trustee for the Atamasthana is entitled only to one vote for the purpose of the election of a Diyawadana Nilame.

Semble.-The provisions of the Civil Procedure Code with regard to the jurisdiction of the District Court are not applicable to applications under section 33 the Buddhist Temporalities Ordinance.

IN terms of section 7 of the Buddhist Temporalities Ordinance, 1931, the Public Trustee issued notices on April 19 to the electors entitled to vote at the election for the office of the Diyawadana Nilame which became vacant on March 25, 1937, to attend a meeting to be held in Kandy on May 22. Since May 22 was proclaimed a public holiday, the Public Trustee thought it necessary to postpone the meeting fixed for that day. He moved the District Court of Colombo on May 18 to extend the time within which the meeting for the election was to take place and informed the electors that the election was postponed for July 3. He further issued fresh notices on May 31 to the electors summoning them to a meeting on July 3.

At the meeting held on July 3, the petitioner and the first respondent were proposed and seconded for appointment to the office of Diyawadana Nilame. At the ballot the first respondent had 45 votes and the petitioner 42 votes. Five ballot papers were at first rejected, but on a scrutiny it was found that three of them were for the petitioner and one for the first respondent. Hence the first respondent was declared elected. The petitioner prayed for a mandate in the nature of a quo warranto to test the validity of the election of the first respondent to the office of Diyawadanax Nilame.

Hayley, K.C. (with him E. B. Wikramanayake and B. H. Aluwihare), for the petitioner.-Under section 7 of the Buddhist Temporalities Ordinance, 1931, on the death of the Diyawadana Nilame, the Public Trustee must summon the persons indicated in section 7 (2) to elect a Diyawadana Nilame: He must summon them within two months.

[MAARTENSZ J.-Should the meeting be held within two months or the summons be issued within that time ?]

The meeting must be held within that time.

The Public Trustee summoned a meeting for May 22. Because the Government declared that day to be a holiday, he postponed the meeting. Section 33 of the Ordinance empowers a Court to extend the time fixed for the holding of the election.

Now Court is denned in section 2.

The District Courts have no jurisdiction with regard to elections. The Supreme Court exercises jurisdiction by way of Mandamus or Writs.

[MAARTENSZ J.-Does not section 33 imply that the District Courts have jurisdiction ?]

There are various duties imposed on the Public Trustee. Section 64 of the Courts Ordinance, 1889, defines the jurisdiction of the District Courts.

There is no authority in this case to postpone the meeting. The District Court of Colombo has no jurisdiction where the office is to be held in Kandy.

On May 31 he issued notice that a meeting would be held on July 2.

Regulations relating to elections mu