JAYANETTI v. THE LAND REFORM COMMISSION AND OTHERS |1984 2SLR 172

Facebooktwitterlinkedinrssyoutube

The petitioner had made an application to the Land Reform Commission (1st
respondent) to purchase 50 acres out of Mount Pearl Estate an agricultural land and
annexed to it a letter of recommendation from the then Member of Parliament the 6th
added respondent as this was an administrative requirement for such an application. By
letter dated 4th March 1982 the Regional Director of the Commission informed the
petitioner that the request could not be granted because the Member of Parliament had
withdrawn his recommendation owing to strong objection raised by the local residents.
The Member for Parliament also informed the petitioner that the land would be
distributed among the local villagers. But a few months later the Member of Parliament
recommended the alienation of 50 acres of this estate to one Mrs. Dassanayake the
4th added respondent whose husband was the Public Relations Officer of the Ministry
of Trade and Shipping and a balance extent of 33 acres to Mr. Weerasinghe the 5th
added respondent who was his brother-in-law and resident with him.
In view of a general direction given by the Minister (2nd respondent) under section 47
of the Land Reform Law that an alienation exceeding 10 acres should have his approval,
the application was sent up to the Minister for his approval with the recommendation of
the Commission. The Minister approved the alienation to Mrs. Dassanayake. This was
conveyed to the parties concerned by letter dated 14.3.1983.

Read the full judgement here

Social Sharing

Related posts