Court of Appeal is to hear petition alleging ‘brazen illegality’ and breach of public trust over apartment project planned for Otters Aquatic Club land
By The Pulseline News Desk
A petition challenging the proposed construction of a residential apartment project on the premises of the Otters Aquatic Club came up before the Court of Appeal o Thursday (17), with counsel for the petitioners describing the transaction as a ‘brazen illegality’ and a ‘flagrant violation of the public trust’.
Appearing before Justices D. Thottawatta and K. M. S. Dissanayake in Case No. CA/Writ/665/2026, President’s Counsel Eraj de Silva, for the petitioners, has submitted that the Urban Development Authority (UDA) and the other respondents had acted in flagrant violation of the public trust, and warned that any construction undertaken on the land would proceed at the risk – and peril – of those who carried it out.
The application has been filed by Mohamed Azarri Cader and Anusha Rodrigo, both former presidents of the Otters Aquatic Club, naming the UDA, Prime Lands Residencies PLC and several others as respondents. It has alleged that the transfer of the club’s premises for a residential apartment development is illegal and unlawful and amounts to a breach of the public trust doctrine.
De Silva PC appeared together with Attorneys-at-Law Janagan Sundramoorthy, N. K. Ashokbharan, Naveed Ahamed and Amasha Pathirana, instructed by Sanduni Rathnayake, for the petitioners. Deputy Solicitor-General Manohara Jayasinghe, with Senior State Counsel Mihiri de Alwis, appeared on behalf of the Attorney-General and for the UDA. Faizer Musthapha PC, with Upul Kumarapperuma PC and Pulasthi Rupasinghe, instructed by Dias and Dias Associates, appeared for Prime Lands Residencies PLC.
Petitioners’ case – A statutory reversion clause
Central to the petitioners’ case appears to be Section 6 of the State Lands Ordinance, which governs land alienated by the State for a special purpose. Under Section 6(2), land granted for such a purpose reverts to the State if it is subsequently used for any other purpose, and Section 6(3) empowers the State to resume possession accordingly. The Otters Aquatic Club premises, it was submitted, had been reserved for club and recreational use, and were vested in the UDA in 2020 on the basis that the premises would be renovated, reconstructed and reopened to the general public.
According to the petitioners, moves to hand the site over for an apartment development project had begun soon afterwards. A public bidding process called in 2021 had attracted no bids. Then, in September 2024 – in the period immediately preceding the presidential election, and under the tenure of Minister Prasanna Ranatunga – Prime Lands Residencies PLC had submitted an unsolicited proposal, together with an advance payment of Rs. 620 million.
The petitioners have contend that, after the change of government, the Cabinet memorandum prepared under Ranatunga was subsequently placed before the Cabinet chaired by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake in substantially unaltered form. The petitioners have also raised serious concerns over the manner in which the proposal was placed before the Cabinet, alleging that the Cabinet was misled over the circumstances surrounding the proposed development of the Otters Club premises.
The petitioners’ position has been that the Cabinet had therefore made its decision on the basis of information that did not fully disclose the circumstances in which the property had been earmarked for the proposed apartment project, the objections raised over its use, and the legality of the process followed.
The Government has defended the arrangement on the basis that it stands to earn some Rs. 3 billion from the property, with residential apartments to be made available to the public. The petition has noted, however, that the Minister of Justice himself had raised concerns over irregularities in the memorandum.
A committee had been appointed by the President, according to a document produced before the court and marked P11, is said to have found the transaction to be illegal but nonetheless recommended that it proceed on the ground that an advance amounting to 25 per cent of the consideration had already been received. A 99-year lease was subsequently granted in favour of Prime Lands Residencies PLC, recorded in a document marked P15(b) – an outcome the petitioners describe as a fundamental breach of the public trust.
A club rooted since 1956
The Otters Aquatic Club has occupied the premises since 1956. Its original lease had expired in 1989, at which point the Thimbirigasyaya Divisional Secretariat had indicated that the lease would be revised and that the club could continue in occupation. In 2011, the Divisional Secretariat had fixed a revised annual rental of Rs. 7.6 million, by which time rental arrears were said to have accumulated to Rs. 120 million. The club had continued to pay the revised rate until 2021, as recorded in a document marked P3.
The UDA had subsequently indicated that the club could not continue on the existing basis but, in recognition of its contribution to aquatic sport, agreed that it might remain in occupation under a fresh arrangement. A tripartite agreement was accordingly entered into between the UDA, the Otters Aquatic Club and Waters Edge, providing for a 10-year term, with any continuation thereafter left to the discretion of the UDA. The premises were formally vested in the UDA in 2020, as reflected in a document marked P4(b).
The petitioners have maintained that they are pursuing the litigation in the public interest, to save the club and to ensure that its premises remain available for the purpose for which they were originally intended.
The matter will be taken up for support before the Court of Appeal on 22 October 2026.
Leave a comment