District Court of Colombo restrains CBEU from holding Central Committee meeting in Galle

A case was filed in the District Court of Colombo on 13 October 2011 by 81 members of the Central Committee of the Ceylon Bank Employees Union against the Ceylon Bank Employees Union seeking an enjoining order, an interim injunction and an injunction preventing the Ceylon Banks Employees Union conducting/holding a Central Committee meeting of the said Union on 16 October 2011 in the Galle Municipal Sports Pavilion for the purpose of electing a General Secretary for the said Union.

Isuru Balapatabendi, Attorney-at-Law, and Tharaka Nanayakkara, Attorney-at-Law, instructed by Punya Jayatillake, Attorney-at-Law, appeared for the 81 plaintiffs who are members of the Central Committee.

Romesh De Silva, President’s Counsel, instructed by G.G. Arulpragasam, Attorney-at-Law, appeared for the defendant bank union.

The District Court issued an enjoining order in favour of the plaintiffs, restraining the defendant (Bank Union) from holding the said meeting on 16 October 2011.

After the said order of the District Court, the Ceylon Bank Employees Union held an Executive Committee meeting on 19 October 2011 and at the Executive Committee meeting, the defendant (Bank Union) decided to hold the said meeting of the Central Committee of the Ceylon Bank Employees Union on 6 November 2011, in the Galle Municipal Sports Pavilion; even though majority of the Executive Committee members opposed the said decision of the Ceylon Bank Employees Union to hold a said meeting in the Galle Municipal Sports Pavilion.

However, the Executive Committee disregarded the said objection of the majority of the members and decided to proceed with organising the said meeting in the Galle Municipal Sports Pavilion.

Forty-three members out of the 82 of the Executive Committee of the Ceylon Bank Employees Union filed action against the said Bank Union on 2 November 2011 at the District Court of Colombo seeking for an enjoining order, interim injunction and injunction restraining the Ceylon Bank Employees Union from holding the said Central Committee meeting at the Galle Municipal Sports Pavilion on 6 November 2011.

Faiszer Musthapha, Attorney-at-Law, and Isuru Balapatabendi, Attorney-at-Law, instructed by Punya Jayatillake, Attorney-at-Law appeared on behalf of the 43 members of the Executive Committee who were plaintiffs.

Romesh De Silva, President’s Council and G.G. Arulpragasam, Attorney-at-Law, appeared for the defendant (Bank Union).

Musthapha submitted to court that the decision of the Executive Committee of the defendant (Bank Union) to hold the Central Committee meeting of the said defendant (Bank Union) is ab initio void in law for the reason that the majority of the Executive Committee has clearly opposed the decision of the Executive Committee to hold the Central Committee in the Galle Municipal Sports Pavilion on 6 November 2011.

Musthapha further submitted to court that the Executive Committee has the power to summon a Central Committee meeting, and if the majority of the Executive Committee is against a decision of the Executive Committee, such decision should not be arbitrarily carried out by the defendant (Bank Union).

Musthapha also submitted to court that even though the expenditure to hold the said Central Committee meeting in Galle is borne by the Executive Committee, it is in fact the money that is collected by way of membership fees of the members of the defendant (Bank Union) that is being spent.

The District Court issued an order in favour of the plaintiffs restraining the defendant (Bank Union) from holding the said Central Committee meeting for the purpose of electing a General Secretary for the Ceylon Bank Employees union, in the Galle Municipal Sports Pavilion, scheduled for 6 November 2011.