The Court of Appeal (CA) has ruled that a public servant has “no absolute right” to any pension or allowances, reaffirming an earlier determination on the matter. Accordingly, the CA has stressed that petitioners cannot request a judicial order to obtain a pension. The CA gave the ruling after considering a writ petition filed by [...]

News

Public servant has “no absolute right” to pension, CA rules

View(s):

The Court of Appeal (CA) has ruled that a public servant has “no absolute right” to any pension or allowances, reaffirming an earlier determination on the matter. Accordingly, the CA has stressed that petitioners cannot request a judicial order to obtain a pension.

The CA gave the ruling after considering a writ petition filed by a group of pensioners requesting the court to issue an order quashing a decision taken by the Government to suspend their pension increase until the issue of pension anomalies is settled.

The CA bench comprising Justices Sampath Wijeratne and Ahsan Marikar has cited several past judgements to explain its decision to dismiss the petition. These include M K B Herath v Jagath D Dias, and Gunawardene v Attorney General. The Court also cited two judgements delivered by Indian courts ruling that the judiciary cannot influence Government policy.

The petition had been filed by 95 petitioners comprising 94 pensioners including retired Director of Pensions K A.Thilakaratne, as well as Mahinda Jayasinghe of the National Organisation for Preservation of Rights of Retired Personnel. They had requested that the Court issue an order quashing the Public Administration Circular issued on January 20, 2020 suspending the pension increases until the pension anomalies issue is resolved.

The Court also upheld the preliminary objections raised on behalf the respondents and the Attorney General by State Counsel Amasara Gajadheera together with Deputy Solicitor General Manohara Jayasinghe.

With Justice Wijeratne agreeing, Justice Marikar noted in his judgement that a Writ of Mandamus could be issued when a legal right of the petitioner is violated, and the respondents should have a corresponding public duty to perform towards the petitioner.

In this petition, however, the petitioners have failed to prove that a legal right which they are entitled for has been violated by the respondents, the judgement stressed.

Attorneys-at-law Shantha Jayawardene with Chamara Nanayakkara, instructed by Sunil Watagala appeared for the petitioners.

Share This Post

WhatsappDeliciousDiggGoogleStumbleuponRedditTechnoratiYahooBloggerMyspaceRSS

The best way to say that you found the home of your dreams is by finding it on Hitad.lk. We have listings for apartments for sale or rent in Sri Lanka, no matter what locale you're looking for! Whether you live in Colombo, Galle, Kandy, Matara, Jaffna and more - we've got them all!

Advertising Rates

Please contact the advertising office on 011 - 2479521 for the advertising rates.