The Supreme Court Judge, Justice Arjuna Obeysekera, today recused himself from hearing an appeal petition filed by former Minister Rishad Bathiudeen relating to the Wilpattu judgment.
Justice Obeysekera, who was a member of the bench, declined to hear this appeal owing to a conflict of interest.
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Gamini Amarasekara, Achala Wengappuli, and Arjuna Obeysekera, fixed the appeal petition for argument on January 19, next year.
Former Minister Rishad Bathiudeen had filed an appeal seeking an order to set aside the judgement of the Court of Appeal
In its judgment, the Court of Appeal on November 16, 2020, issued an order directing the Conservator General of the Department of Forest Conservation to take action to implement a tree planting programme in accordance with the provisions of the Forest Ordinance in any area equivalent to the reserve forest area used for re-settlement of IDPs.
The Court of Appeal further ordered former Minister Rishad Bathiudeen to bear the full cost of the tree planting programme in these areas, applying the polluter pay principle.
In his special leave to appeal petition, Bathiudeen has raised several legal issues relating to the judgement of the Court of Appeal. The respondent-petitioner (Bathiudeen) stated that the Court of Appeal had failed to consider whether the petitioner of the writ petition in the Court of Appeal had locus standi or was competent to maintain the application by way of public interest litigation.
He further stated that the findings of the Court of Appeal that the respondent-petitioner was instrumental in getting the land released for the settlement of IDPs were unsupported by evidence. He further said that the Court of Appeal has granted relief against the Conservator General of the Department of Forest Conservation inasmuch as no relief whatsoever was claimed against him.
Initially, the Center for Environmental Justice had filed a writ petition in the Court of Appeal naming the Conservator General of Forest Conservation Department, Central Environmental Authority (CEA), Director General of Wild Life Department, Commissioner General of Lands, Commissioner General of Archeological Department, Mannar District Secretary, Rishad Badiuddeen, the Minister of Industry and Commerce, the Minister of Environment and Mahaweli Development, and the Attorney General as respondents.
The Court of Appeal had also issued a consequential order directing Rishad Badiuddeen to bear the full cost of such a tree planting programme, applying the polluter pay principle since, according to the evidence before the Court, he was instrumental in using the reserved forest land for the resettlement of the IDPs.
