SC reserves order for today

Published : 9:15 am  January 19, 2018 | No comments so far |  | 

(255)

 reads | 

SLPP bid to prevent Maharagama UC Poll: 

The Supreme Court yesterday reserved its order for today on the Writ petition filed by Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) challenging the rejection of its nomination papers for the election of members to the Maharagama Urban Council. 

 

The Bench comprised Chief Justice Priyasath Dep, Justices Buwaneka Aluvihara and Nalin Perera.   


SLPP Secretary Sagara Kariyawasam and its Authorized Agent H.K. Chandrasiri de Silva filed the Petition citing Elections Commission Chairman Mahinda Deshapriya, Members of the Elections Commission, Commissioner General of Elections R.M. A. L. Rathnayake Commissioner General of Elections / Director General, Returning officer for Maharagama Urban Council Damayanthi Wanigasinghe and Secretaries of Political parties as well as the leaders of the Independent groups as Respondents.   


Manohara de Silva PC appeared for the Petitioners. Chinthaka Jayasundera PC with Pulasthi Rupasinghe and Chinthaka Fernando appeared for the Secretary of the SLFP. Deputy Solicitor General Viveka Siriwardane appeared for the Elections Commission and the Attorney General.

   
Petitioners seek the immediate intervention of Supreme Court to prevent the alleged injustice being caused to their political group being deprived from contesting at the forthcoming Local Authorities Election for the Maharagama Urban Council pursuant to a decision made by the Returning Officer to reject their nomination paper.   


They state their nomination paper for the Maharagama Urban Council to Returning Officer was rejected for not having met the requirements stipulated under section 28 (2B) read with S. 31 of the Local Authorities Elections Act (as amended).   


They maintained that section 28B was not a requirement to be complied with by a political party but reads that, (2B) ‘The returning officer shall as soon as is practicable make a copy of each nomination paper received by him and display such copies of the nomination papers on his notice board.”   


They state though the total number of women representatives were met as required by law, inadvertently and/or by mistake in front of a single woman representative the gender had been written as ‘male’ as oppose to ‘female’.   


They contend the rejection of their nomination papers is ultra vires, illegal, unlawful and unreasonable.   


They maintain the nomination paper ex-facie fulfilled and/or substantially fulfilled all requisites and the requirements especially as required under S. 28 and 29 of the Local Authorities Elections Act(as amended).   


They allege the purported decision of the Returning Officer to reject the said nominations paper amounts to a curtailment of the rights of the candidates and/or subversion of the right to franchise of the voters of the locality in the proposed local authority elections.   


They are seeking the Court to quash the decision of the Returning Officer and prevent the Respondents from rejecting their nominations paper.   


They are also seeking an Interim Order preventing the Respondents from holding the local authority elections in respect of election of members to the Maharagama Urban Council until hearing and final determination of this application.     

 

(255)