SLPP bids to prevent Maharagama UC Poll: SC reserves order for today

The Supreme Court yesterday reserved order for today the writ petition filed by Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) challenging the rejection of its nomination paper for the election of members to the Maharagama Urban Council.

The bench comprised Chief Justice Priyasath Dep and Justices Buwaneka Aluvihara and Nalin Perera.

 SLPP Secretary Sagara Kariyawasam and its Authorized Agent H.K. Chandrasiri de Silva filed the petition citing Election Commission Chairman Mahinda Deshapriya, Members of the Election Commission, Commissioner General of Election R.M.A.L. Rathnayake, Commissioner General of Election/Director General, Returning officer for the Maharagama Urban Council Damayanthi Wanigasinghe and secretaries of political parties as well as the leaders of the independent groups as respondents.

Maohara de Silva PC appeared for the petitioners. Chanthaka Jayasundera PC with Pulasthi Rupasinghe and Chinthaka Fernando appeared for the Secretary of the SLFP. Deputy Solicitor General Viveka Siriwardane appeared for the Elections Commission and the Attorney General.

The petitioners seek the immediate intervention of the Supreme Court to prevent the alleged injustice being caused by them being deprived from contesting the forthcoming Local Authorities Election for the Maharagama Urban Council pursuant to a decision made by the Returning Officer to reject their nomination paper.

They state their nomination paper for the Maharagama Urban Council to the Returning Officer was rejected for not having met the requirements stipulated under Section 28 (2B) read with S.31 of the Local Authorities Elections Act (as amended).

They maintain Section 28B was not a requirement to be complied with by a political party but reads: “The returning officer shall as soon as is practicable make a copy of each nomination paper received by him and display such copies of the nomination papers on his notice board.”

They state that although the total number of women representatives was met as required by law, mistakenly in front of a single female representative the gender had been written as ‘male’ instead of ‘female’.

They contend that the rejection of their nomination papers is ultra vires, illegal, unlawful and unreasonable.

They maintain the nomination paper ex-facie fulfilled and substantially fulfilled all requisites and the requirements especially as required under Section 28 and 29 of the Local Authorities Elections Act (as amended).

They allege the purported decision of the Returning Officer to reject the said nominations paper amounts to a curtailment of the rights of the candidates or subversion of the right to the franchise of the voters of the locality in the proposed local authority elections.

They are seeking the Court to quash the decision of the Returning Officer and prevent the respondents from rejecting their nomination paper.

They are also seeking an interim order preventing respondents from holding the local authority elections in respect of the election of members to the Maharagama Urban Council until the hearing and final determination of this application.