Sam S Wijesinha now has 2 criminal charges in Fort Magistrates Court

 Wednesday, 04 June 2014 

SC dismisses Sam Wijesinha’s application 

The Supreme Court dismissed a special leave to Appeal application filed by Sam Wijesinha, the retired Secretary General of Parliament and retired Ombudsman. The petitioner had appealed to the Supreme Court to set aside a Court of Appeal Judgment dated October 24, 2007 which said, "Hence, it is abundantly clear that the petitioner Mr. Wijesinha, is entitled to only one pension. It follows, that the petitioner had been drawing payment in excess of what is due. A writ cannot be issued to quash the decision of the Divisional Secretary of Colombo to stop the payment of petitioner's pension receivable in terms of Award No. J. 228060 of August 7. 1981."

The petitioner had filed an appeal in the Supreme Court to get that Court of Appeal judgment set aside.
Sam Wijesinha, appeared in person. N. G. Pulle, Senior State Counsel, appeared for the respondents, the Director of Pensions and others.

The Supreme Court Bench comprised the Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva Justice N. G. Amaratunga and Justice J. Balapatabandi.

A landmark ruling / A second pension for ex-Secy Gen. of Parliament
Pension Chief’s right to stop extra payment, recover 1.5 million from plaintiff upheld by Shamindra Ferdinando

In a landmark judgment, the Appeal Court has ruled that former Secretary General of Parliament Sam Wijesinha has no right to draw two pensions.

Wijesinha sought court intervention after Pensions Chief K. A. Thilakaratne stopped payment of the first pension after the Colombo Divisional Secretariat detected what Thilakaratne called unlawful payment. This came to light when the Divisional Secretariat was in the process of rectifying pension anomalies
In a lengthy ruling, the Appeal Court has upheld Thilakaratne’s decision taken in consultation with Secretary to the Public Administration Ministry. The Pensions Chief has been represented by the Attorney General.

It transpired before the Appeal Court that Wijesinha had received two pensions-one as the retired Secretary General of Parliament and the second as the retired Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (Ombudsman) for over 12 years. 

After his retirement on July 31, 1991 after completing 10 years as the Ombudsman at the age of 70, the Pensions Department had prepared a pension after taking into consideration both his appointments. But this was subjected to the prerequisite that the first pension would be stopped. 

But due to the negligence on the part of the Pensions Department for over a decade, Wijesinha had received an extra pension. A senior official said that the Department should have detected the extra pension years ago.

The Appeal Court also upheld the Pensions Chief’s decision to recover Rs 1.5 million which had been paid to Wijesinha over the amount due to him. Immediately after stopping the additional pension, the Pensions Chief had started deducting the money on a monthly basis of 50 per cent of the pension he was entitled to.

The Appeal Court also directed plaintiff to pay costs to the defendant. In his application, Wijesinha reiterated his right to a double pension on the basis depriving him of one pension would be against the law.

The Pensions Department, in its defence pointed out that Wijesinha would be drawing a pension even higher than that of retired Chief Justice, had he been allowed to draw two pensions.

The Island in a front-page exclusive story on October 25, 2004 revealed the dispute between Thilakaratne and Wijesinha over the former’s decision to stop the additional pension. Thilakaratne, in an interview with The Island, revealed his decision to stop one pension and recover the entire sum paid over the amount due to him. Wijesinha, in a statement issued to the press, challenged our story headlined Pensions chief requests PMG, IGP for help to wipe out fraud with a sub headline …stops second pension to ex-Secy. Gen. of Parliament. 

The Island learns that an attempt was made by a senior public official to settle the case out of Court. The Attorney General Department had conducted an in-depth investigation before the recent landmark judgment was given.

Legal sources said that there had not been a previous case similar to this. Well informed sources said that the Pension Department was in the process of investigating fraudulent activity particularly relating to unauthorised drawing of pensions.

1st-Case No. 74916/13 under section 392 - criminal breach of trust, that while being / having the Power of Attorney of Mrs Maive Outschoorn, widow of Dr Aubrey S. (Buds) Outschoorn for misappropriation of 15.5 million rupees from the sale of the house and land on 32 perches inherited from her mother at No.7, 8th Lane Colombo 3.

The 2nd charge 386-is apparently for misapplication of the same amount.