Perera v. National Housing Development Authority – sllr 2001 volume 3 page 050

The case between Perera (plaintiff) and the National Housing Development Authority (defendant), with involvement of entities such as the Urban Development Authority and Church Authorities, addressed the issue of whether a writ of mandamus should compel the defendant to declare lot 1288 as a reservation exclusively for residents of zone 6 in the Raddolugama Housing Scheme. It was held that no such writ could be issued, as the petitioner failed to establish a clear public right or a corresponding public duty on the part of the defendant. The decision reaffirmed the principle that mandamus is only available to enforce an existing legal right and a mandated public duty, relying on legal precedents such as Napler Ex Parte, R v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Commissioner of Police v. Gordhan