073-NLR-NLR-V-74-W.-PIYASENA-Petitioner-and-P.-V.-W.-SILVA-Respondent.pdf
Piya&ena t». Silva
253
1967Present : H. N. G. Fernando, C.J., and Silva, J.
W.PIYASENA, Petitioner, and P. V. W. SILVA, Respondent
S. C. 4Sj66—Application for a Writ of Quo Warranto in terms of Section 42of the Courts Ordinance [Cap. 6) in respect of the election of a Memberto Ward iVo. 1 of the Ambalangoda Urban Council
■Local Authorities Elections Ordinance [Cap. 262)—Section 9 (J) (d)—Person holdingappoin merit at a Government school—Ineligibility for election as member ofan Urban Council—•Effect of interdiction from duty.
A person holding {in appointment and rocoiving a salary at a school whichbecame vested in the Govornmont after tho Assistod Schools and TrainingColleges (Supplementary Provisions) Act Mo. S of 19G1 was passed holds apublic offico under tho Crown within the moaning of section 9 (1) (d) of thoLocal Authorities Elections Ordinance and is, thorofore, disqualified foreloctionas a mombor of an Urban Council, ovon though hq is under interdiction fromduty at tho time of tho election. Interdiction involves only thointerruption of duties and not tho termination of an ofiico.
_/.PPLrCATIO>T for a writ of quo warranto challenging the validity ofthe election of tho respondent as member of an Urban Council.
IF. D. Gunasekera, for tho petitioner.
Nimal Senanayalcc, with P. Nanayakkara, for the respondent.
Cur. adv: vult.
254
H. N. G. FERNANDO, C.J.—Piyasena v. Silva
August 29, 1067. H. N. G. Fernando, C.J.—
At the election of members of tho Ambalangoda Urban Council heldin 1965, tho respondent was by notice duly published in the Gazelleof 31st December 1965 declared to hare boon elected member for WardNo. 1 of tho Council. This is an application for a Writ of Quo Warrantoto declare the election null and void on the ground that tho respondentwas at tho time of tho election disqualified for such election becausehe held, and still holds, a public office under tho Crown in Ceylon.Tho disqualification attaches by reason of the provisions of Section9 (1) (d) of the Local Authorities Elections Ordinance (Cap. 262).
The respondent had for some years been employed as a teacher inwhat were known as “ Assisted Schools ” which were not GovernmentSchools, although they received assistance from public funds in the formof grants. But from and after tho passing of tho Assisted Schools andTraining Colleges (Supplementary Provisions) Act, No. S of 1961, anumber of such schools became vested in the Government; thereafterall appointments of teachers to such schools wero made directly by thoGovernment and their salaries were paid directly out of public funds.Since the passing of the Act of 1961 therefore the post of teacher inevery such school is a public office. Tho particular Governmentschool at which tho respondent was employed at that time was St.Mary’s School, Elpitiya. At that time too, the respondent was a memberof the Ambalangoda Urban Council, and his evidonco is that towardsthe end of 1962, he was requested by tho Department of Education-to resign his political office. He refused to do so, and by letter of 31stOctober 1962 his services as a teacher were terminated.
According to the respondent, a circular v'as sent after the passing oftho Act of 1961 asking toachcrs at schools taken over under the Actto state whether they ..wished to becomo Government teachers. Thorespondent states that ho then asked for such appointment, but subjectto tho condition that ho would havo political rights. Tho circular orthe respondent’s reply to it have not been produced. The respondent’schief grievance now appears to bo that his expectation of retainingpolitical rights has been defeated. But even if he justly has such agTicvanco, no assurance from tho Department of Education, or fromany other authority, is now of avail to him.
Upon the evidence recorded in this Court, it is not quite clear whetherall proper formalities were observed in regard to tho absorption of thorespondent into tho public service or to his postings.thereafter. Buttho letters of June 1965 to and from him, and the pay sheets for Junoand September 1965 clearly show that prior to the local election holdthat year the respondent held an appointment at a Government schooland received his salary as such. Ho docs not deny that he held thatappointment at tho timo of the election or that he is still in receipt of
WEERAMAXTRY, J.—Scnanayake v. Abdul Coder
255
part salary in that capacity. He receives part salary because ho wasinterdicted from duty in August 1965 for reasons apparently not relevantfor present purposes. Interdiction involves only the interruption ofduties and not the termination of an office.
I hold therefore that t-ho respondent was at the time of his electiondisqualified under Section 9 (1) of Chapter 262 for holding office as amember of the Ambalangoda Urban Council. The declaration askedfor by the petitioner is granted with costs fixed at Rs. 157-50.
Silva, J.—I agree.
Application allowed.