Source: https://www.kapruka.com/Sri_Lanka/law/view_legal_document.jsp?type=text&key1=Judgements&key2=SLR&key3=SLR-1998%20Vol.3-P265&key4=Constitution%20Judgements
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 08:49:41+00:00

Document:
clause - Could the court question the conduct of the Commission - Excess of jurisdiction/ nullity-ultra vires.
Secretary/Defence as The Commission of Inquiry (Batalanda Commission) had made adverse findings against the petitioner.
for the reason that the said decision has not been taken by the proper authority - P.S.C.
thereafter recommended to the PSC that approval be granted to place the petitioner on compulsory leave.
decision was in fact made.
and such a decision is void and therefore it is open to a court to declare such decision a nullity.
making for the better thereby avoiding the need for intervention by court . . .
although it had acted as if it were.
thereafter under the colour of the concept of ratification.
APPLICATION for Writs of Certiorari/Prohibition.
1. Cader and others v. Commissioner for Mosques and Muslim Charitable Trusts and others - 66 NLR 16.
2. Abeywickrema v. Pathirana and others 1986 1 SLR 120.
3. PG Ratnayake v. Secretary, Ministry of Public Administration and others -SC 277/95 (FR) SCM 7.5.97.
4. Anisminic Ltd. v. Foreign Compensation Commission - 1969 2 AC 147.
5. Brook v. Brook 1871 Law Reports Exchequer 99.
6. Keighley v. Maxstead - 1901 AC 240 - 1937 AC 898.
K. N. Choksy PC with Mohan Pieris and Ms. K. Wijetunga for petitioner.
K. S. Kamalasabaysen PC, Addl S. G. with U. Egalahewa, SC, for respondent.
Inspectors-General, throughout the whole country.
places of unlawful detention and torture chambers at the Batalanda Housing Scheme.
taking place, refrained from taking appropriate steps to halt such illegal activity from continuing.
findings arrived at by the Commission contained in the Report.
leave the island without my prior approval.
05. Please acknowledge receipt of this letter.
It is this order contained in P1, placing the petitioner on compulsory leave that is being challengedinthisapplication.
XII of the Establishments Code has no application.
control of other public officers to the Public Service Commission : . . .
of P1 referred to above.
Secretary, Public Service Commission, to the respondent. The letter P2 produced below reads as follows.
This refers to your letter dated 17. 08. 1998.
body of persons should exercise such power and come to a decision, without allowing the decision to be made byanyoneelse.
Service Commission, for placing the petitioner on compulsory leave, which was granted on the same day by R2.
Commission. What is necessary here for the Public Service Commission is to keep the decision in their own hands.
the Public Service Commission after a proper evaluation of the available material.
a decision is void and therefore it is open to a court to declare such a decision a nullity. In the caseofAnisminicLtd.
order or decision made is a nullity.
of the statutory authority without it is nothing.
Once the court has declared that some administrative act is legally a nullity, the situation is as if nothinghadhappened.
fresh - something which it might otherwise be unable to do.
make no order as to the costs of the application.
U. DE Z. GUNAWARDANA, J.
the issues that arise, I think, it is fitting that I should give my reasons in a separate judgment.
decision in question made by the respondent.
delegation in respect of an individual officer or a delegation ad hominem.
not have the shadow of a power to do so.
necessarily be subsequent (in point of time) to the seeking thereof.
respondent to place the petitioner on compulsory leave, had been invalid at its inception.
leave - as the sequel would further serve to show.
Ministers, its powers of appointment, transfer, dismissal or disciplinary control of any category of public officers.
Commission of the decision in question - as the power to ratify is subsumed indelegationorsubdelegationofauthority.
another person even if that person be the proper authority. Judicial bench - mark was set on thissubjectinKeighleyvs.
Maxsted(6) A corn merchant was authorized to buy wheat at a certain price on a joint account for himself and theappellants.
action against them for breach.
administrative hierarchy within which instructions from above may properly be given on the question at issue.
1.Mr. M. M. Gunaratne- Senior D.I.G.
respondent's recommendation for their own judgment thus ousting its own (judgment).
I think we have now arrived at almost the end of our discussion of the matters relevant to the issues arisingfordecision.
leave. Perhaps, the going back of the clock will be automatic-working of itself.
seeking to validate it by ratification.
whose conscience with injustice is corrupted."
invalidity before prohibiting its enforcement.
granted forbidding the respondent from further execution of the impugned decision dated 17.08.1998 made by him.
Writ of Certiorari/Writ of Prohibition granted.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.