007-NLR-NLR-V-67-M.-MANIKE-Petitioner-and-N.-D.-JAYAWEERA-Deputy-Food-Controller-and-another.pdf
1964Present: Tambiah, J.M. MANIKE, Petitioner, and N. D. JAYAWEERA (DeputyFood Controller) and another, Respondents
S. G. 355,'64—Application for a Writ of Mandamus
Food Control Act (Cap. 171)—Regulations framed under section 6—Regulation 4 (2) ofPart III—Rice ration book—Effect of describing it as a non-national rice rationbook—Citizenship Act. s. 6—Mandamus.
A holder of a rice ration book which has been described, for administrativepurposes, as a “ non-national rice ration book ” cannot obtain a writ ofmandamus to compel the Deputy Food Controller to issue a fresh rationbook on the footing that he is a citizen of Ceylon. The mere declarationthat a person is a citizen of Ceylon or a non-citizen by the officers who arebound by Regulation 4 (2) of Part III of the Food Control Regulations to issuerice ration books does not confer the status of citizenship or deprive a personof liis citizenship.
Application for a writ of mandamus.
Suntheralingam, for Petitioner.
H. L. de Silxxi, Crown Counsel, for the Respondents.
Cur. adv. tniU.
December 8, 1964. Tambiah, J.—
This is an application by the petitioner, who claims to be a citizen ofCeylon, for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Deputy FoodController, who is the first respondent, to issue the 22nd series of riceration book to the applicant.
The first respondent in his affidavit denied that the petitioner is acitizen of Ceylon and further stated that the petitioner lived in an areawhere a system of rationing supplies of rice by coupons has been intro-duced and she is entitled to the issue of a ration book to procure suppliesof the said controlled commodity in terms of Regulation 4 (2) of Part IIIof the Food Control Regulations (published in the Ceylon GovernmentGazette No. 10,416 of June 20, 1952). These regulations were framedunder Section 6 of the Food Control Act (Cap. 171) of the Revised Editionof the Legislative Enactments of Ceylon 1956.
The first respondent in his affidavit stated that he had caused to beissued to the petitioner a rice ration book of the 22nd series to procurethe said controlled commodity for the period 1st October, 1964 to 30thSeptember 1966 through the Grama Sevaka of Division No. 168 of theJaSna District and that the petitioner has taken charge of the rationbook. The first respondent also stated that there are no rice rationbooks designated by law as “ Non-National Rice Ration Books ” orstyled as such on their face.
Mr. Suntharalingam contended that the rice ration book issued to thepetitioner has been described as “ Non-National rice ration book ” andshe has thus been discrimated. It is not for this Court to find outwhether the petitioner is a citizen of Ceylon or not or whether she hasbeen discriminated.
The only question in this petition is whether the duty imposed by theregulations had been performed. Since the rice ration book had beenissued the duty imposed upon the first respondent had been fulfilled. Themere declaration that a person is a citizen of Ceylon or a non-citizen bythe officers who are authorised to issue rice ration books does not conferthe status of citizenship or deprive a person of his citizenship. It wouldhave been much better had the first respondent issued ration cardswithout any labels. Mr. Suntharalingam contended that these riceration books are used to discriminate persons and that some personsholding '* non-national ration books ” have been refused land forsettlement. Such people have remedy under Section 6 of the CitizenshipAct. A person could apply to the Minister for a declaration that he is acitizen of Ceylon. There is also the common law remedy for a person to
come to Court and ask for a declaration that he is a citizen of Ceylon. Itis a prerequisite to the grant of a writ of mandamus that the duty imposedeither by statute or common law had not been performed—see Ex parteNapierl, Queen on the ProsecvMon of Miller and Others v. County Councilof Glamorgan *. The duty imposed by the regulations is to issue a rationbook for the relevant period. The relevant portions of the Food ControlRegulation 4 (2) Part HI (published in Govt. Gazette No. 10,416 of June20,1952) reads as follows : “ The Deputy or Assistant Food Controller forany District or area shall, where a system of rationing supplies by couponshas been introduced in such district or area, save as otherwise providedin regulations 6 and 7, issue a ration book or cause a ration book to be issuedto every inhabitant of that district or area who has attained the age of one year,in order to enable such inhabitants to procure supplies of a controlledcommodity during that period of control”. The first respondent hascomplied with this regulation by issuing the 22nd series of the ration bookfor that period. Under Section 5 of the Food Control Regulations aperson who issues any ration book should specify therein the name of theinhabitant to whom the book is issued and may enter any other particularsas the Food Controller may direct. In view of these provisions an entrysuch as “ citizen ” or a “ non-citizen ” could be entered for administrativepurposes in the rice ration book that is issued. Indeed the first respondentin his affidavit has stated that the particulars in the ration book weregiven for administrative purposes. The regulations do not say that aparticular type of ration book which is distinguished either by colour orother particulars should be issued to a person who is entitled to it.
Application dismissed.
For these reasons I dismiss the application with costs fixed at RupeesFifty-two and cents fifty only.