Source: https://www.lawnet.gov.lk/1977/12/31/alwis-v-thiagarajah/
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 03:09:52+00:00

Document:
ALWIS v. THIAGARAJAH.588—M. M. C. Colombo, 39.
Colombo Municipal Council (Constitution) Ordinance, s. IS (2) (c) (Cap.
The Manager of the State Mortgage Bank does not hold a public officeunder the Crown within the meaning of section 15 (2) (c) of the ColomboMunicipal Council (Constitution) Ordinance.
^ PPEAL from an order* of the Municipal Magistrate of Colombo.
The appellant objected to the double qualification mark credited to therespondent in the list prepared under the provisions of the ColomboMunicipal Council (Constitution) Ordinance on the ground that therespondent, who is-the Manager of the State Mortgage Bank holds apublic office under the Crown.
The Municipal Magistrate disallowed the objection.
It is the Governor who, as representative of the Crown, legislates inCeylon, and the State Council is only an advisory body. The expression“ public office under the Crown ” does not imply that the holder of the.office should be directly appointed by the Crown; he may be appointedby an agent or representative. The words “ under the Crown ” arewords not of limitation but of explanation.
The position of the Crown in a place like Ceylon is considered inBerriedale Keith’s Governments of the British Empire (1936) p. 25. TheCrown is the creator of every office, and all public officers hold officeunder the Crown mediately or immediately—Stephen’s Commentaries(5th ed.) p. 535; 6 Halsbury’s Laws of England (Hailsham ed.), paragraph548; Article 72 of the State Council Order in Council, 1931. For meaningof public office, see Cooray v. de Zoysa1; Henley v. Mayor and Burgessesof Lyme1; Tennant v. Smith’; and Langston v. Glasson*.
* (1936) 5 C. L. W. Ill at 120.. 3 (1892) 66 Law Times (N. S.) 327 at 329.
– 130 English Rep. 995 at 1001.* (1891) L. J. Q. B. 356.
There are a number of other institutions in Ceylon where the Governorhas certain powers, e.g., under the Rubber Control Ordinance (Cap. 300),the Tea Control Ordinance (Cap. 299), the Coconut Products Ordinance(Cap. 129), and the Tea Propaganda Ordinance (Cap. 130). Furtherthere are departments which are state-aided and in which the Governorhas certain powers of control and supervision; but it does not follow thatthose are Government departments, e.g., Municipal Councils, UrbanCouncils, and Village Communities. See particularly sections57, 58, 66, 70, 78, 83, 84, 86-89, 91-93, 103 and 106 of the MunicipalCouncil (Constitution) Ordinance (Cap. 194) and sections 2, 5, 6, 9, 10,12, 14-46, 18—21, 31, 35, 54, 167, 171, 173, 175 186 193 196—214 of theUrban Councils Ordinance (Cap. 195).
Section 26 of the Savings Bank Ordinance (Cap. 278) shows clearlythat members of a public corporation are not public officers, for by thatsection the officers of that bank are specially declared to be public officers.Despite the fact that the funds of that bank are vested in the Governor,it was necessary to legislate that the officers of that institution should beregarded as public officers.
The State Mortgage* Bank provides its own finance and the funds areunder the control of the Directors. The debentures are made a chargeon the Government revenue merely to create credit for the Bank. Whenthe Governor appoints directors and officers he does not act in his executivecapacity as a representative of the Crown but by virtue of special powersconferred on him by legislation.
H. V. Perera, K.C., in reply—if the office is one created by the Crown,it is necessarily a public office under the Crown.
The respondent to this appeal was credited with a double qualificationmark in the “list” prepared under the provisions of the ColomboMunicipal Council (Constitution) Ordinance. To this, G. William Alwis,a registered voter, objected on the ground that the respondent, who isthe Manager of the State Mortgage Bank, holds a public office under theCrown and is, therefore, not entitled to the double qualification mark.
The Municipal Magistrate of Colombo took the view that the respondentholds a public office, but not under the Crown, and disallowed theobjection. The objector has now appealed.
The King v. de Silva.
In my opinion the words of limitation “ under the Crown ” in therelevant Ordinance point to an intention, on the part of the legislature,that the expression “ public office under the Crown ” should be given arestricted, rather than a wide, interpretation.
The respondent undoubtedly performs functions of a public nature.In that sense he holds a public office and his office, as indeed do all publicoffices, derives from the Crown. But, as he is paid by the Bank out of itsown revenue and not the public revenue, he does not. hold, in my view,within the meaning of section 15 (2) (c) of the Colombo Municipal Council(Constitution) Ordinance, “ a public office under the Crown ”.

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