Under the Rules “Advanced Drawing” was not a main subject for the final examination for the Degree of Bachelor of Fine Arts. Where the Rules are clear and unambiguous it is impermissible and unnecessary to refer to the Examination Criteria in order to interpret the Rules. For a student who has selected Design, “Advanced Drawing” is a subject but not a “Main subject”. In respect of a student who selected Design the only requirement for an ordinary pass is that she should obtain an average of 40% in the examination.…
Read MoreTag: human rights
LUCAS APPUHAMY v. MATURATA AND OTHERS S.C. APPLICATION NO. 87/94.
Where there were sufficient grounds for suspecting that a cognizable offence had been committed by the petitioner, his arrest without a warrant was in accordance with procedure prescribed by the Code of Criminal Procedure and therefore not in violation of Article 13(1) of the Constitution. Where the medical evidence of the injuries found on the petitioner was consistent with the version of the Police that they had been sustained in the process of the use of reasonable force in making the arrest, it cannot be said that a violation of…
Read MoreKODITUWAKKUGE NIHAL POLICE SERGEANT KOTALAWALA AND OTHERS SC APPLICATION NO. 1 2 6 /9 4
The Is’ to the 10th respondents were police officers attached to the Police Guard Room, Boralesgam uw a w hich com es u n d er the M aharagam a Police Station. On 04. 03. 1994, the petitioner w as arrested by the 1st and 2nd respondents for a traffic offence and taken to the Police G uard Room, Boralesgam uwa after using m uch force on him. W hilst in police custody, the 1st, 2nd, 4lh and 5th respondents assau lted him. He was assau lted with a rubber…
Read MoreGAMINI DISSANAYAKE (PETITIONER IN SC 4/91) v. M. C. M. KALEEL AND OTHERS | 1993 2SLR 135
Eight Members of the United National Party who were also members of Parliament singly filed eight petitions bearing numbers SC 4 – 11/91 challenging their expulsion from the Party. The respective petitioners in applications No. SC 5/91 and No. SC 8/91 were Ministers of Cabinet rank in the UNP government shortly before their expulsion. The petitioner in application No. SC 9/91 and the petitioner in application No. SC 10/91 were a State Minister and Project Minister respectively in ttie UNP government shortly before their expulsion. The petitioners have filed their…
Read MoreBANDARA AND ANOTHER v. PREMACHANDRA, SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LANDS, IRRIGATION AND MAHAWELI DEVELOPMENT AND OTHERS | 1994 1SLR 301
The 22 petitioners along with 15 others were selected to follow a four-year residential course leading to the award of a Bachelor’s degree in the Surveying Service. Only Class III, Grade III Surveyors were eligible to follow this course. The 1st respondent issued letters of appointment appointing them as Surveyors in Class II Grade III on probation for a period to be notified (but not notified). Shortly thereafter the petitioners became members of the Government Surveyors’ Association, a Trade Union. The Annual General Meeting of the Association was held on…
Read MoreCHANNA PIERIS AND OTHERS v. ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND OTHERS, the Ratawesi Peramuna Case and judgement was given by supreme court. SC APPLICATIONS NO. 146/92 TO 154/92 AND 155/92 (SEVEN APPLICATIONS)
The ten applications were by consent considered together. The applicants in the ten applications were granted leave to proceed for the alleged infringements of their rights guaranteed by Articles. The petitioners were participants in a “movement” called the Ratawesi Peramuna formed in November 1991 under the leadership of Atureliya Rathana and patali champika ranawaka. the disruption in January 1992 of the exhibition of posters in Matara and the resurgence of the JVP were discussed after which a manifesto was introduced by Champika Ranawake the petitioner in Application No. 154/92. There…
Read MoreJAYASINGHE vs SAMARAWICKREMA AND OTHERS S.C. APPLICATION NO. 157/91
The petitioner was arrested on 23.07.91 (though Police gave the date as 06.06.91) and taken to the Eheliyagoda Police Station, and questioned about suspected links there until 07.08.91, when he was taken to the Deraniyagala Police Station where he was tortured. The petitioner had disappeared after 23.07.91. On learning he was at Eheliyagoda Police Station the petitioner’s mother and father had visited him daily at the Police Station, Eheliyagoda between 26.07.81 and 07.08.91 and there he had not been assaulted. On 29.07.91 the petitioner’s mother had complained to the International…
Read MoreSUBBASH CHANDRA FERNANDO vs KAPILARATNE, OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, POLICE STATION, GAMPAHA S.C. APPLICATION NO. 1/91
The petitioner is a Medical Practitioner with a MBBS degree from the University of Ceylon. He was arrested on 19.07.89 on a complaint that he had assaulted Dr. Gunatilaka, Surgeon, Base Hospital, Gampaha and obstructed the carrying on of the service at the hospital in breach of Regulation and e Emergency Regulations. The complaint against the petitioner was that he had assaulted Dr. Gunatilaka twice on 19.07.89 first’at the path lab, a private medical establishment, and thereafter at the Base Hospital, Gampaha. Although he was arrested for such conduct under…
Read MoreWIMAL VIDYAMANI vs LT. COL. JAYATILLEKE AND OTHERS S.C. APPLICATION NO. 852/91 SPL
The petitioner who was the Mill Security Officer at the Embilipitiya Mill of the National Paper Corporation was arrested and detained by the Police under emergency regulations for being allegedly concerned in a subversive J.V.P attack on the Paper Mill. Thereafter, he was transferred to the Pelawatte Detention Camp and detained under a Preventive Detention Order. The petitioner had an exemplary record of service and had won the confidence of his employer. There was no material to warrant the suspicion that the petitioner had J.V.P. links or was concerned in…
Read MoreRATNAPALA v. DHARMASIRI, HEADQUARTERS INSPECTOR, RATNAPURA AND OTHERS SC APPLICATION 162/91
respondents had assaulted and brutally tortured the petitioner over a period of three weeks. The injuries suffered by the petitioner were irreparable, particularly in view of the fact that one of his lungs had to be surgically removed. The 1st (Hector Dharmasiri, Headquarters Inspector) and 2nd (I.P. Gunasekera, officer-in-charge), respondents deliberately encouraged, tolerated and acquiesced in the acts of torture and inhuman treatment inflicted on the petitioner on whom the J.M.O. found 26 injuries. Hence the 3rd, 5th, 6th and 7th respondents who have been identified by the petitioner along…
Read More