The Court of Appeal will hear further arguments on October 12 concerning a dispute over the parliamentary seat held by Jaffna District MP Ramanathan Archuna. The matter centers on whether Archuna was a public servant at the time he submitted his nomination papers for the election, which could affect his eligibility to serve as a member of parliament.

The issue was raised in a petition filed by social activist Oshala Herath, who argued that Archuna was employed as a government medical doctor when he lodged his nomination, thereby rendering him ineligible to run for office. The petitioner requested the nullification of Archuna’s membership, citing constitutional restrictions on public servants holding parliamentary positions.

During proceedings before a bench comprising Judges Mayadunne Corea and Mahen Gopallawa, attorney Senani Dayaratne, representing Archuna, requested that the Court of Appeal refer the matter to the Supreme Court for an interpretation of whether Archuna qualified as a public servant at the relevant time. Dayaratne emphasized that Archuna had been suspended from his government position when submitting his nomination papers. He cited Clause 70 of the Constitution, which defines a government servant as someone holding a government position and receiving a salary. According to Dayaratne, Archuna did not fulfill either of these criteria at the time.

Opposing the referral, lawyer Ashoka Baran, acting for the petitioner, argued that Archuna remained a government employee and held a state position. Baran contended that the Court of Appeal possessed the authority to adjudicate the matter without seeking advice from the Supreme Court.

The Court has yet to issue a ruling on whether the petition will be referred to the Supreme Court or decided within the Court of Appeal itself. Proceedings on the dispute are expected to continue at the next scheduled hearing on October 12.