041-SLLR-SLLR-1997-V3-AMAL-SURIYAGE-AND-OTHERS-v.-S.-B.-DISSANAYAKE-MINISTER-OF-YOUTH-AFFAIRS-S.pdf
404
Sri Lanka Law Reports
[1997] 3 Sri L.R.
AMAL SURIYAGE AND OTHERS
v.
S. B. DISSANAYAKE
MINISTER OF YOUTH AFFAIRS, SPORTS ANDRURAL DEVELOPMENT AND OTHERS
COURT OF APPEAL.
DR. RANARAJA, J.
C.A. 517/97OCTOBER 13, 1997.
Writ of Certiorai – Sports Law No. 25 of 1973 – Sections 32, 32(c) and 33 -Regulations 20, 35 and 37 of the Constitution of the Cycling Federation – Ministerpurporting to act under section 32(c), 33 to suspend the Federation – Legality ofsame – Absolute or untrammelled discretion in Administrative Law.
The 1st and 2nd petitioners were elected as Vice Presidents at the Annualdeneral Meeting. The 1st respondent. Minister of Sports purporting to act undersection 32(c) and section 33 of the Sports Law suspended the registration of theFederation and appointed the 2-8th respondents to continue the functions of theFederation.
Held:
(1)The Minister has purported to act in terms of section 32(c) and Not in terms ofthe other two subsections (a) and (b). The basis of the suspension is thereforethat the office bearers of the Federation were duly elected to office and thatthey failed to carry out their duties and functions. Section 31 of the Sports Lawhas vested the Minister with the power to prescribe by regulations, inter aliathe duties, powers and functions of the Federation.
The Minister could not have exercised any power of suspension under section32(c) without first calling upon the office bearers to explain why they failed tocarry out their duties and functions.
•(2) Even assuming the 1st respondent acted under section 32(a), he could nothave suspended the registration of the Federation without the Secretary to theMinistry first calling upon the office bearers in writing to remedy anymalpractices etc., within such time specified in such notice, the procedureunder section 32(a) has not been followed and thus the Minister in any eventcould not have acted under section 32(a).
‘In public regulation of this sort there is no such thing as absolute anduntrammelled discretion, that is that action can be taken on any ground or forany reason that can be suggested to the mind of the administrator. Nolegislative act can without express language, be taken to contemplate anunlimited arbitrary power, exercisable for any purpose, however capriciousor irrelevant regardless for the nature or purpose of the stature.
CA
Amal Suriyage and Others v. S. B. Dissanayake, Minister of Youth Affairs.
Sports and Rural Development and Others (Dr. Ranaraja. J.)
405
APPLICATION for a Writ of Certiorari.
Case referred to:
1. Roncareili v. Duplessis (1959) 16 DLR(2d) 689 at 705.
Shibly Aziz, PC., with Nigel Hatch for the petitioner.
Wijedasa Rajapakse, with Kuwera deZoysa for 1st respondent.
Cur. adv. vult.
October 13,1997.
RANARAJA, J.
The Cycling Federation of Sri Lanka was named and registered topromote, encourage supervise and Control Amateur and ProfessionalCycling and to protect the interests, and welfare of cyclists in terms ofthe Sports Law No. 25 of 1973,
The last Annual General Meeting of the Cycling Federation ofSri Lanka was held on 29.03.1997. The 1st and 2nd petitioners wereelected as Vice Presidents while the 3rd and 4th petitioners wereelected as Honorary Secretary and Honorary Treasurer respectively.The 6th respondent, a coach attached to the Ministry of Sports,participated at that election as an observer on the instructions of theDirector of Sports, The Deputy Director of Sports by letter dated
called for details, setout therein, of the new office bearers ofthe said Federation. That request was complied with by fetter of theAssistant Secretary of the Federation dated 24.4.1997.
The 1st respondent, Minister of Sports purporting to act in terms ofsection 32(c) and 33 of the Sports Law, by order P 16(a) dated
suspended the registration of the Federation withimmediate effect and appointed the 2nd to 8th respondents tocontinue the functions of the Federation during the period ofsuspension and/or the election of new office bearers of theFederation. The petitioners have filed this application inter alia, for awrit of certiorari quashing order P16(a).
Section 32 of the Sports Law No. 25 of 1973 reads;
406
Sri Lanka Law Reports
11997] 3 Sri L.R.
“The Minister may refuse registration, suspend or cancel theregistration, of a National Association of Sports;
(aj for failing or neglecting to remedy any malpractices,misconduct or irregularities on the part of the office bearers ofmembers of such Association, on being noticed to do so in writing bythe Secretary to the Ministry within such time as may be specified insuch notice; or
for inactivity, non-cooperation or obstruction in theimplementation of the policies of the Ministry; or
for failing to carry out its duties and functions.”
As seen, the Minister has purported to act in terms of section 32(c)and not in terms of the other two subsections (a) and (b). The basisof the suspension is therefore that the office bearers of the Federationwere duly elected to office and that they failed to carry out theirduties and functions. Section 31 of the Sports Law has vestedthe Minister with the power to prescribe by regulation, inter alia,the duties, powers and functions of the Federation. Copies of suchregulations marked P3 and 1R1, as amended by P3a. P3b, P3c, P3ehave been filed. Regulation 25 states, subject to the provisions ofthe law and the regulations made thereunder a National Associationshall be the controlling body for the entire island of the sport orgroups of Sports in respect of which it is registered and shall take allsuch steps as are necessary for the promotion and developmentof such sport or group of sports. Subject to any directions thatmay be given by the Secretary, it shall be the duty of everyaffiliated member of a National Association to comply with anydirections given by that Association. The functions and powersof the Federation are further explained in section 20 of itsConstitution P1.
Regulation 37 requires every National association to furnish to theSecretary all information required by him relating to the exercise,discharge and performance of such association of its powers, Dutiesand Functions. This requirement is repeated in section 35 of theFederation’s Constitution. Admittedly no such information was called
CA
Amal Suriyage and Others v. S. B. Dissanayake, Minister of Youth Affairs,
Sports and Rural Development and Others (Dr. Ranaraja, J.)
407
for by the Secretary, nor is there the slightest suggestion, that theoffice bearers failed to perform their duties and functions set out inregulation 25 or section 20 of the Constitution of the Federation*
Thus the Minister could not have exercised any power ofsuspension under section 32(c) of the Sports Law without first callingupon the office bearers of the Federation to explain why they failed tocarry out their duties and functions.
The 1st respondent Minister has in his objections pleaded that thepetitioners,
have no locus standi to initiate these proceedings,
failed to file an affidavit in conformity with the law.
are not qualified to be elected to hold office in the CyclingFederation.
The respondents have failed to elaborate on (a) above. Theaffidavit of the 3rd respondent and the documents filed suffice tosupport the petition. Regulations 13 and 14 in P3, 1R1 set out thedisqualifications making any person ineligible to be elected to holdoffice as a member of any national sports association. Similarlysection 17(c) and (d) of the Constitution of the Federation set outgrounds of disqualification to be elected an office bearer of theFederation.
Section 30 of the Sports Law confers a right on parties aggrievedby any decision or action of a registered national association ofsports to appeal to the Minister. Regulation 40 in P3/1R1 provides;“(1) where any person, body, club, organization or affiliate isaggrieved by the decision of its National Association, such personbody, club, organization or affiliate may submit a written appeal to theMinister within a period of fourteen days from the date on which suchdecision was conveyed to such person, body, club, organization oraffiliate.
(2) The order of the Minister on such appeal shall be given effectto by such National Association.”
The 1st respondent states that he received several complaints withregard to non-granting of voting rights to nine clubs at the said Annual
408
Sri Lanka Law Reports
[1997] 3 Sri LR.
General Meeting (1R4-1R10). 1R4, and 1R5 are letters written beforethe Annual General Meeting. 1R6-1R9 are complaints made within the14 days stipulated in regulation 40, from the day the Annual GeneralMeeting was held. He also avers that the 6th respondent not beingsatisfied with the conduct and the procedure adopted in conductingthe election of office bearers submitted a report indicating allirregularities thereat. (1R2/1R3). 1R2 is dated 31.3.97 i.e.: two daysafter the Annual General Meeting. The 1st respondent had appointedDeputy Director of Sports, Mrs. P. Siriwardena, to hold an inquiry intothe said complaints. The Deputy Director had submitted her report1R12. The 1st respondent states he had thereupon “acting undersection 32 of the Sports Law suspended the Association by P16 andappointed an interim board by letter marked P16(a) in compliancewith section 33 of the Sports Law.”
Even assuming for the purpose of argument that the 1strespondent acted under the provisions of section 32(a),he could nothave suspended the registration of the Federation without theSecretary to the Ministry first calling upon the office bearers of theFederation in writing to remedy any malpractices, misconduct orirregularities within such time specified in such notice. Admittedly, theprocedure set out in section 32(a) has not been followed. TheMinister thus, in any event, could not have acted under section 32(a)to suspend the Federation.
"Any administrative act or order which is ultra vires or outsidejurisdiction is void in law, ie; deprived of legal effect. This is becausein order to be valid it needs statutory authorisation, and if it is notwithin the powers given by the Act, it has no legal leg to stand on.”Wade & Forsyth – Administrative Law 7th ed – P43.
“In public regulation of this sort there is no such thing as absoluteand untrammelled" discretion “that is that action can be taken on anyground or for any reason that can be suggested to the mind of theadministrator: no legislative Act can, without express language, betaken to contemplate an unlimited arbitrary power, exercisable forany purpose, however capricious or irrelevant, regardless of thenature or purpose of the statute. Fraud and corruption in theCommission may not be mentioned in such statutes but they are
CA
Amal Suriyage and Others v. S. B. Dissanayake, Minister of Youth Affairs,
Sports and Rural Development and Others (Dr. Ranaraja, J.)
409
always implied as exceptions. Discretion necessarily implies goodfaith in discharging public duty, there is always a perspective withinwhich a statute is intended to operate, and any clear departure fromthe lines or objects is just as objectionable as fraud or corruption” -Rand, J. in Roncareiti v. DuplessismaX 705.
The 1st respondent avers that he appointed the Deputy Director ofSports to inquire into the eligibility of the candidates and it was on herreport 1R12, that he proceeded to suspend the registration of theFederation. The findings of the Deputy Director at the inquiry aresummarised as follows.
The election of office bearers was not conducted in the normalmanner in that the voting was for two lists and not for individualcandidates,
Decisions were taken which were prejudicial to severalassociations.
Many irregularities have taken place as a result of the samepersons holding office for a long period of time.
However, the Deputy Director has hastened to add that she did notinquire into items (2) and (3) above in detail. Her finalrecommendation was that the Minister should, using his powersvested in him, remove from office the office bearers and hold a freshelection. The Minister could have acted on the recommendationfollowing the procedure set out in section 32(a) and the office bearersfailing or neglecting to remedy the alleged malpractice, misconductor irregularities, upon being noticed to do so by the Secretary. The1st respondent not having followed that procedure, acting ultra vireshis powers, purportedly under section 32(c) suspended theregistration of the Federation, which subsection could be made useof for an entirely different purpose. The 1st respondent thus beingmisled on the provisions of the law, has acted outside his jurisdictionin suspending the registration of the Federation and appointing the2nd to 8th respondents to continue the functions of the Federation.Both orders have therefore to be set aside. The application is allowedin terms of prayers (b) and (c) to the petition without costs,
Application allowed.