K.L. Chandrala de Silva & Ms. K.K. Dayakanthi Ashoka vs Commissioner of Labour – CA 274/2017-2017

In the case between K.L. Chandrala de Silva, Ms. K.K. Dayakanthi Ashoka (Petitioners) and the Commissioner of Labour, Department of Labour (Respondent), the court addressed whether the respondent was required to exhaust procedures under Sections 17 and/or 38(1) of the Employees’ Provident Fund Act, including making a determination that recovery by such means was impracticable or inexpedient, prior to issuing certificates for recovery under Section 38(2). It was held that, given previous rulings in the Magistrate’s Court rejecting the petitioners’ arguments and the petitioners’ submission to the court’s jurisdiction without appeal, the initiation of a parallel writ application amounted to an abuse of judicial process. The court reaffirmed the principle that where an alternative remedy has b