Kandy Times

The Kandy District Judge ordered the defendants in the Kandy Girls' High School Development Society to file the accounts of the Society audited by a Chartered Accountant within sixty days.

District Judge Bandula Nissanka Karunaratne earlier quashed the stay order and directed that the school activities be continued without hindrance to the students.

When the case was taken up, the interim order was also quashed and the order to audit the accounts by a Chartered Accountant was made.

The earlier stay order was issued by the District Judge on the Kandy Girls’ High School Development Society on an application made by three Plaintiffis who are teachers of the same school and by virtue of the fact that they were members of the Society by their being parents.

The stay order was against the use of Society funds until the conclusion of a case filed before court by these three members as Plaintiffs. But, the stay order was quashed earlier and the interim order remained in force, which too was also dissolved on this day.

In this case, W.Y.M.W.A. Jayawardene Tutor of the School and a member of the SDC, Jayantha Wickramasooriya a parent and member of the SDS and another Tutor Seevali Ariya Kulasinghe and a member of the SDS had filed plaint before the Kandy District Court citing as respondents the Principal Mrs. H.M. Wataliyadde, a Tutor and the Treasurer of the SDS Mrs. J.M. Abeykoon, Ms. J.A.B. Abenaiyake a Tutor and also the General Secretary of the SDS and S.B. Dammunupola a member of the SDS and also the Assistant Secretary by the virtue of the fact that his daughter was a student of the school.

The Plaintiffs and respondents were present in court when the case was taken up.

On the first day of inquiry, the District Judge sought from the first Plaintiff M.Y.M.W.A. Jayawardene whether he agreed with the accounts that were shown by the respondent’s attorney. The Pliantiff submitted that he did not agree with the accounts showed to him in court.

In the plaint submitted to court it had been set out that in the agenda of the Annual General Meeting held on May 7, 2006, provision had not been made to table the accounts but only an estimate of accounts had been set out.

The plaint had further stated that before the annual accounts were submitted at the general meeting, the accounts should have been submitted to an Education Department Staff Officer and certified.

It is also alleged in the plaint that the accounts were not discussed but were just circulated, contravening the purpose of the meeting.

Attorney-at-Law Lal Wijenaike appeared for the plaintiffs.

Attorneys-at-Law Harilal Wickramaratne, Dhammika Hettihewage, Ms. Kumari Abeyratne and M.B. Samarakoon appeared for the defendants.