IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST

REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA

In the matter of an application

under Article 121 against a Bill titled
"Value Added Tax (Amendment) Act,
No.
of 2016"

Udaya Prabhath Gammanpila,

65/14G,Wickremasinghe Mawatha
Kumaragewatta Road
Pelawatta
Battaramulla
SC (SD) Appl. No.

/2016
PETITIONER

Vs.

Honourable Attorney-General,
Attorney-General's Department,
Colombo 12.
RESPONDENT

TO HIS LORDSHIP THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THEIR LORDSHIPS AND THE
OTHER HONOURABLE JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA

On this 04th day of October, 2016.

The Petition of the Petitioner above-named appearing by Ms. Anusha

Perusinghe, his Registered Attorney-at-Law, states as follows:
1. The Petitioner is a citizen of Sri Lanka, and an Attorney-at-Law of the
Supreme Court.

2. The Petitioner is the founder and General Secretary of the Political party
called and known as Pivithuru Hela Urumaya and presently a Member of
Parliament, representing the United Peoples Freedom Alliance.
3. The Petitioner states that he has a duty in terms of Article 28 of the
Constitution, as a person living in Sri Lanka, inter-alia toa. Uphold and defend the constitution and Law;
b. Further the National interest and;
c. Preserve and protect public property and to combat misuse and waste
of public property.
4. In the circumstances the Petitioner states that he has sufficient public
interest with regard to the grievances pertaining to which this application
relates and to seek the reliefs sought for in this application.
5. The Petitioner states that the Attorney-General is made a Respondent to this
application under and in terms of Article 134(1) of the Constitution.
6. The Petitioner states that a Bill titled "Value Added Tax (Amendment) Act,
No.
of 2016" has been gazetted on 13.09.2016 on the directions of the
Minister of Finance, and the same has been placed on the order paper of
Parliament on 04.10.2016.
Copies of the said Bill in English and Sinhala are annexed hereto marked X1 and X2
respectively.

7. The Petitioner states that the Bill is described in the long title as "AN ACT TO
AMEND THE VALUE ADDED TAX ACT, NO. 14 OF 2002 ".
8. The Petitioner states that clauses 17, 4, 13 and 18 of the said Bill, are in
violation of Articles 3, 4(d), 12(1), 12(2), and 14(1)(g) of the Constitution
inasmuch as;
a. Clause 17 (2)(c) removes healthcare services provided by medical
institutions or professionally qualified persons from the list of
exempted items commencing from the date on which the said Bill
comes into force,
b. Clause 4 (15) of the said Bill purports that the "value of supply of
healthcare services shall be the value of such supply less the cost of
diagnostic tests, dialysis and, services provided by the Out Patient
Department but excluding medical consultation services, which
description and/or classification has no rational nor reasonable
objective basis and is illogical and unreasonable, discriminatory and
arbitrary.
2

c. Clause 13 (2) of the said Bill amends subsection (3) of Section 25C of
the principal enactment with retrospective operation with no rational
nor reasonable objective basis and is further illegal, illogical and
unreasonable, discriminatory and arbitrary.
d. Clause 18 of the said Bill purports to legalize the unlawful collection of
Value Added Tax from 01.01.2016 until the date on which the said Bill
comes into operation with no rational nor reasonable objective basis
and is further illegal, unreasonable, discriminatory and arbitrary.

9. The Petitioner further states that Clauses 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,

14, 15 and 16 of the said Bill are in violation of Articles 3, 4(d), 12(1), 12(2),
and 14(1)(g) of the Constitution.
10.The Petitioner states that in the aforesaid circumstances, the entire Bill
and/or any one or more of the Clauses and/or Sections thereof cannot
become law unless passed by two-thirds of the whole number of the
Members of Parliament and approved by the People at a referendum.
11.The Petitioner states that he has not invoked the jurisdiction of Your
Lordships' Court previously in respect of matters stated herein.
12.The Petitioner states that a copy of this Petition and documents has been
dispatched to the Honourable Speaker through registered post.
WHEREFORE, THE PETITIONER RESPECTFULLY PRAYS THAT YOUR LORDSHIPS'
COURT BE PLEASED TO:
a) Hear the Petitioner;
b) Declare that Clauses 1 and/or 2 and/or 3 and/or 4 and/or 5 and/or 6 and/or
7 and/or 8 and/or 9 and/or 10 and/or 11 and/or 12 and/or 13 and/or 14
and/or 15 and/or 16 and/or 17 and/or 18 of the said Bill are in violation of
Articles 3, 4(d), 12(1), 12(2), and 14(1)(g) of the Constitution, and therefore
require to be passed by not less than two-thirds of the whole number of
members of Parliament as required under Article 84(2) and approved by the
people at a Referendum by virtue of provisions of Article 83;
c) Grant costs,
d) Such other and further relief as Your Lordships' Court shall seem meet.

Registered Attorney- at- Law for the Petitioner