Wimal Withana vs Paneer Selvam and Hon. Attorney General – sllr 2012 volume 1 page 254

In the case between Wimal Withana (Plaintiff) and Paneer Selvam with the Hon. Attorney General (Defendants), the court addressed the issue of whether the Court of Appeal correctly interpreted Section 23(5) and Section 28A(3) of the Urban Development Authority Law (as amended by Act No. 4 of 1982), and whether the delegation of powers by the UDA pertaining to planning matters was legally permissible within the statutory context. It was held that Section 28A(3) is encompassed within the concept of “planning,” and that the powers delegated under Section 23(5) were validly exercised by the UDA. The decision resulted in the setting aside of the Court of Appeal’s ruling and the reinstatement of the Magistrate’s demolition order. This holding reaffirmed the interpretative principle that statutory