The law recognizes that the principles of equality does not mean that every law must have universal application’for all persons who are not, by nature, attainment or circumstances in the same position. What is required is that persons who by nature, attainment or circumstances are similar are treated alike. If there is a classification which deals alike with those who are similarly situated, someone who is different cannot be allowed to complain that he has not been treated equally; for being different, he must necessarily expect to be treated differently.…
Read MoreTag: Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
The case of Amal Sudath Silva vs Kodithuwakku, inspector of police and Others S.C. APPLICATION No. 186/86.
The petitioner pleads that he was arrested by the police on 9.10.1 386 on suspicion of having committed theft of side mirrors from several motor vehicles. He was thereafter taken to the Panadura police station in custody for 5 nights without being produced before a Magistrate During this period of 5 days he states he was severely beaten up by the 4 respondents with batons and was also subjected to physical torture by them by being hung to a beam at the police station by his hands tied to a…
Read MoreROBERTS AND ANOTHER v. RATNAYAKE AND OTHERS |1986 2SLR 36
The second petitioner, the Sri Lankan wife of the 1 st petitioner a foreigner, held tenancies of 3 stalls and two bare land leases from the Kandy Municipal Council at the Jathika Pola, Tomlin Park. Kandy where she carried on several businesses including that of a cafe. The petitioners complain they have been the victims of a relentless and unceasing series of attempts to deprive the 2nd petitioner of her tenancies and destroy her business by improper…
Read MoreJAYANETTI v. THE LAND REFORM COMMISSION AND OTHERS |1984 2SLR 172
The petitioner had made an application to the Land Reform Commission (1st respondent) to purchase 50 acres out of Mount Pearl Estate an agricultural land and annexed to it a letter of recommendation from the then Member of Parliament the 6th added respondent as this was an administrative requirement for such an application. By letter dated 4th March 1982 the Regional Director of the Commission informed the petitioner that the request could not be granted because the Member of Parliament had withdrawn his recommendation owing to strong objection raised by…
Read More