Legal experts decry demolition of STC Dining Hall

Friday, 6 March 2026 00:00 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

Lawyers and building conservators have raised a major legal alarm over the planned demolition or radical modification of the historic Dining Hall at S. Thomas’ College, Mount Lavinia. Experts contend that the project, part of the school’s “Phase IV Senior Quadrangle” development, violates several statutory provisions designed to protect national heritage.

Prominent public interest litigator and environmental law specialist, Attorney-at-Law Dr. Ravindranath (Ravi) Dabare, stated that the proposed works are “manifestly illegal” under current Sri Lankan law. Dr. Dabare, known for his role in high-profile cases involving the preservation of public assets and the environment, noted that the age of the structure places it under the direct protection of the state.

According to Dr. Dabare, the Dining Hall — constructed between 1918 and 1922 — crosses the critical legal threshold defined in the Antiquities Ordinance No. 9 of 1940 (as amended by Act No. 24 of 1998).

Section 16 of the Ordinance explicitly states that any monument that has existed for not less than 100 years is legally classified as an antiquity and an “ancient monument”. Dr. Dabare emphasised that “the law does not require a building to be formally gazetted to be protected; its age alone grants it status as an antiquity. Any act of ‘injudicious treatment,’ demolition, or structural alteration is a non-bailable criminal offence”.

The controversy comes as S. Thomas’ College celebrates its 175th anniversary this year. While the Phase IV project is supported by a significant Rs. 600 million donation from philanthropist and Old Trinitian Eng. Nahil Wijesuriya, critics argue that modernisation should not come at the cost of destroying the legacy of Warden William Arthur Stone, who conceptualised the campus layout over a century ago.

“Heritage is a public trust,” Dr. Dabare concluded. “The school authorities are merely trustees of these buildings for future generations of Sri Lankans. They do not have the legal right to erase a century of history in the name of ‘remodeling.’”.