Petition challenging Selendiva Investment project fixed for April 7

• Selendiva Investments Ltd was formed in accordance with a Cabinet approval granted on or around March 24, 2020
• Some of the properties to be vested with Selendiva Investments Ltd are said to be historic and architecturally valuable buildings 

By Lakmal Sooriyagoda   

A Fundamental Rights petition seeking an order prohibiting the Treasury Secretary from selling, leasing, or alienating state properties vested in Selendiva Investments Limited Company was yesterday re-fixed for April 7 by Supreme Court.   

This petition was taken up electronically via Zoom technology before the Supreme Court two-judge-bench comprising Justice S. Thurairaja and Justice A.H.M.D. Nawaz.  

The Attorney General yesterday sought a three-week period to file objections.  
This petition had been filed by Secretary of the Professionals’ National Front of Sri Lanka (PNF) G. Kapila Renuka Perera.  

According to the petitioner, Selendiva Investments Ltd was formed in accordance with a Cabinet approval granted on or around March 24, 2020, with 100 percent ownership vested in the Secretary to the Treasury, with the goal of transforming the State-owned hospitality portfolios to optimum performance levels through appropriate restructuring.  
The Petitioner states that, on or around the 18th of May, 2021, he has seen a press briefing of cabinet decisions which included information relating to several approved proposals including, State-owned Canwill Holdings (Pvt) Ltd, Hotel Developers (Lanka) PLC and Hotels Colombo Ltd which have been already vested in Selendiva Investments Ltd at present.  

The petitioner also feared that it would cause irreparable harm to the country’s cultural heritage, as some of the properties to be vested with Selendiva Investments Ltd are said to be historic and architecturally valuable buildings that are listed to be preserved in the City of Colombo Development Plan 1999.  

If the cabinet decision is executed, the petitioner and the citizens of this country will lose access to important historical, archaeological and architecturally valuable sites located in the aforementioned territories, the petitioner said.