Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
..... 13/2005 was issued, the 1st petitioner in sc fr application no 73/07 wrote the letter dated 3rd august 2005 (p8a) to the director of ifs seeking permanent status, and that a few months later, five members of the academic staff of ifs including some of the petitioners, addressed a joint letter dated 8th february 2006 (annexure to p13) to the secretary to the president in which they urged in the final paragraph as follows: as our institute is directly under ..... learned presidents counsel also referred to certain documents which show that the question of granting permanent status to non-academic staff of the ifs engaged the attention of the institute after the issuance by the ministry of public administration of pa circular no: 27/2001 dated 29th october 2001, and the question was considered at two meetings of the board of ..... it appears that at the second of these meetings held on 1st april 2002, it was decided that all non-academic staff who did not hold permanent posts should be considered for permanency in accordance with the cadre positions approved by the management services department and provisions of pa circular no: 27/001 ..... and other representatives of the government, there can be little doubt that, as submitted by learned presidents counsel for the petitioners, the actions of ifs concerning the conditions of service and tenure of the senior academic staff of the institute, constitute executive or administrativeaction within the meaning of article 126 of the constitution. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
..... the qualifications for the recruitment under the scheme of recruitment of academic staff has been produced by the 2nd respondent and marked as 1r4. ..... petitioner argued that, at that time, he was even qualified for the post of senior lecturer grade ii in terms of the qualification that has been set out in paragraphs 6(1) and 2(i) or (ii) and 3 of the scheme of recruitment for the academic staff issued by the university grants commission circular no. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
..... the government and the ford foundation on behalf of the aforesaid support group, very clearly spells out the rights, privileges and immunities that are to apply to the appellant institution, its director general and other staff .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
dr. shirani a. bandaranayake, cj. this is an appeal from the judgment of the court of appeal dated 05-09-2002. by that judgment the court of appeal had dismissed the application of the petitioner-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) who had sought writs of prohibition and certiorari. the appellant preferred an application to this court for special leave to appeal for which this court had granted special leave to appeal on the following questions: 1. can the customs interpret the nature of the goods that can be exported under and in terms of the agreement x8? 2. is the power of the customs restricted to verifying whether the goods exported conform to the goods said to be exported by exporters? the facts of this appeal, as submitted by the appellant, albeit brief, are as follows. the appellant is a duly incorporated limited liability company that was formed to setup and operate a business of mining and processing of silica quartz for export. processed silica had never been exported from sri lanka and if the project was successful it would not only be profitable for the appellant company, but also would have brought a large number of foreign exchange to the country. silica quartz is used, inter alia, for the manufacture of chips in computers, quality tumblers and quality ornaments. the board of investment, which was formerly known as the greater colombo economic commission (hereinafter referred to as the boi) had always invited business ventures of this nature .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
dr. shirani a. bandaranayake, j: this is an appeal from the judgment of the high court (commercial) of colombo dated 28.03.2000. by that judgment the high court had granted relief in favour of the plaintiffs-respondents (hereinafter referred to as the respondents) in terms of prayers a, b and c of the plaint. the defendant-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) appealed to this court in terms of high court of the provinces (special provisions) act, no. 10 of 1996 read with section 756 of the civil procedure code and the said appeal was fixed for hearing. when this matter was taken up for hearing additional solicitor general for the appellant, learned presidents counsel for the 1st respondent and learned counsel for the 2nd respondent agreed that the appeal could be considered on the following question: whether the undertaking of the secretary to the treasury contained in clauses 9 and 10 of the agreement marked p7, binds the state.? the facts of this appeal, as submitted by the learned additional solicitor general, for the appellant, albeit brief, are as follows: the respondents instituted action in the high court of the western province against the appellant, seeking to enforce a purported agreement against the state and claiming the following: a. a declaration that the secretary to the treasury had acted in breach of clauses 9 and 10 of the purported agreement annexed to the plaint marked p7; b. that the secretary to the treasury be directed to execute a 99 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
chandra ekanayake j: the 1st to 60th petitioners by their petition dated 20.01.2009 (filed together with an affidavit of the 1st petitioner) had sought reliefs by way of declarations to the effect that the 1st to 13th respondents have violated the fundamental rights of the petitioners' guaranteed under article 12(1) of the constitution and that the decision of the 1st to 13th respondents and/or 14th to 21st respondents to categorise the petitioners as management assistants (ma) is null and void and that the petitioners are entitled to be categorised either as middle management (mm) or junior management (jm) or as executives or managers thereof and to be so appointed to such grade forthwith, an order to quash that part of p6 strictly in so far as it is applicable to the petitioners, a direction to the 1st to 13th respondents and/or 14th to 21st respondents to take steps forthwith to categorise the petitioners either as middle management (mm) or junior management (jm) or as executives or managers thereof. further, the petitioners had sought compensation in a sum determined by this court. when this application was supported on 19.2.2009 this court had proceeded to grant leave to proceed in respect of the alleged violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under article 12(1) of the constitution. the petitioners are employees of the 14th respondent board namely industrial development board (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the idb?) holding the posts of 'enterprise .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
shiranee tilakawardane, j. this is a direct appeal from the decision of the trial-at-bar dated 25.08.2011 whereby the learned judges found the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th accused-appellants guilty on the following counts: count (1): did conspire to abduct muthuthanthri bastiange dinesh tharanga fernando in order that such person maybe murdered or put in danger of being murdered and as a result of the said conspiracy you did commit the offence of abduction punishable under section 355 read with section 113(a) and 102 of the penal code. count (2): did conspire to abduct goniamalimage dhanushka udayakantha aponso in order that such person maybe murdered or put in danger of being murdered and as a result of the said conspiracy you did commit the offence of abduction punishable under section 355 read with section 113(a) and 102 of the penal code. count (3): did conspire to murder muthuthanthri bastiange dinesh tharanga fernando and as a result of the said conspiracy you did commit the offence of murder punishable under section 296 read with section 113(a) and 102 of the penal code. count (4): did conspire to murder goniamalimage dhanushka udayakantha aponso and as a result of the said conspiracy committed the offence of murder punishable under section 296 read with section 113(a) and 102 of the penal code. count (5): did abduct muthuthanthri bastiange dinesh tharanga fernando in order that such person maybe murdered or put in danger of being murdered and thereby committed an offence .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
saleem marsoof j. this order pertains to certain preliminary objections taken up on behalf of the 11th and 12th respondent-respondents (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the "11th and 12th respondents") in regard to the maintainability of this application. basic facts by way of introduction, it may be useful to set out in outline the basic facts that give rise to the aforesaid objections. the president of sri lanka has made order on 12th january, 2013 in terms of article 107(2) of the constitution of sri lanka removing the petitioner-respondent from the post of chief justice pursuant to a resolution for her impeachment being passed by parliament and the president addressing parliament as contemplated by article 107 of the constitution. prior to this development, the petitioner-respondent had filed an application dated 19th december 2012 in the court of appeal seeking inter alia a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the report of the parliamentary select committee that found her guilty of certain charges of misbehaviour and a writ of prohibition against the 1st respondent-respondent and/or the 2nd to 13th respondent- respondents (hereinafter sometimes collectively referred to as the "respondent- respondents") from taking any further steps pursuant to the said report. the court of appeal by its judgement dated 7th january 2013, issued a writ of certiorari quashing the said findings and also a writ of prohibition on the speaker and the parliamentary select committee .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
..... different categories under the above circular are given below: categoriespercentagechildren of residents living in close proximity to the school50%children of old boys/girls of the school25%brothers/sisters of students currently studying in the school15%children of staff members under the ministry of education05%children of transferred public servants04%children of families resident abroad and returning to the country01% the 1st petitioner submitted an application on behalf of the 2nd petitioner for admission under "brothers .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
j.a.n. de silva, cj: the court of appeal has referred the following question to the supreme court: whether the words any court referred to in article 89(d) of the constitution refer to the supreme court, court of appeal and the other courts of first instance, to the exclusion of tribunals and institutions or whether the words any court include a court martial?. the court of appeal referred to articles 24(5), 105 and 13(4), of the constitution, and to section 2 of the judicature act no 2 of 1978, as amended. the argument for the petitioner is that: 1 any court referred to in article 89(d) does not include courts martial, as per article 105 of the constitution; 2 judicial power of the people is exercised through courts, tribunals and institutions created and established, or recognised, by the constitution vide article 4 (c) of the constitution and as such, not through courts martial that are convened by, consisting of, and confirmed by, the executive; 3 article 24 of the constitution which deals with the language of the courts, has in an inclusive application, included tribunals and other institutions within its limited purview, and, as such tribunals and other institutions are not courts? with reference to the rest of the constitution; 4 courts martial are ad hoc appointments and lack the permanency and other features of regular courts; 5 courts martial are not bound by the evidence ordinance nor the code of criminal procedure, and members of a court martial are not members .....
Tag this Judgment!