With the Supreme Court unable to reach a consensus in granting special leave to appeal on the Writ application filed by S.B. Dissanayake against the Appeal Court judgement, Mr. Dissanayake`s counsel told court that they would support this matter further by way of a motion with adequate notice to the respondents.
This came up for hearing before a three-judge Bench comprising Justices Shirani A. Bandaranayake, N.E. Dissanayake and N.G. Amaratunga.
The Writ application was filed in the Appeal Court to prevent Mr. Dissanayake`s parliamentary seat being filled. The Appeal Court in its judgement refused to issue notice on the respondents in respect of the Writ application.
Mr. Dissanayake in his appeal cited Parliament Secretary General Priyani Wijesekera, Elections Commissioner Dayananda Dissanayake and Nuwara Eliya Electoral District Returning Officer R.M.B.B. Rathnayake as respondents.
On January 3 this year, Mr. Dissanayake filed a Writ of application in the Appeal Court seeking a Writ of Prohibition preventing the respondents from taking steps to fill the seat held by him. Early last year, he was asked by the Supreme Court to show cause as to why he should not be punished for making a contemptuous statement at Habaraduwa on November 3, 2003. The Supreme Court, on December 7 last year convicted him of the offence of contempt of court and sentenced Mr. Dissanayake to two years rigorous imprisonment.
In his application he said the parliament Secretary General was taking steps to inform the Elections Commissioner that his seat become vacant.
Mr. Dissanayake contends he is not liable to be disqualified from being an elector within the meaning of Article 89(d) of the Constitution or any other provision contained in the Constitution since the provision contained therein would not apply to his case.
Lawyers Faisz Musthapha, Desmond Fernando, Kolitha Dharmawardane and Chandana Perera appeared for S.B. Dissanayake while Deputy Solicitor General Palitha Fernando and State Counsel M.R. Ameen appeared for the respondents.