Weerasinghe v. Podimahatmaya and Others – sllr 1994 volume 3 page 230

In the case between the petitioner (applicant for the gemming licence) and the 1st and 2nd respondents (co-owners objecting to the licence for lot 2) along with the 3rd respondent, the State Gem Corporation, the court addressed the proper exercise of discretion under Regulation 8 of the State Gem Corporation Act regarding the refusal to issue a gemming licence for lot 2 of a co-owned land. It was held that the Corporation’s refusal to grant a licence for lot 2, pending judicial resolution of disputed title claims by the co-owners, constituted a proper exercise of discretion. The principle reaffirmed is that adjudicating disputed ownership falls outside the statutory remit of the administrative body issuing mining licences. The decision emphasized that administrative discretion must not be