SC rules Colombo and Kolonnawa councils responsible over Meethotamulla tragedy

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Colombo Municipal Council and the Kolonnawa Urban Council violated fundamental rights of residents by illegally dumping waste on the land known as “Pothuvil Kumbura” in Meethotamulla.

The ruling was delivered in a fundamental rights petition filed by a group of residents from the affected area, including lawyer Nuwan Bopage, said Ada Derana reporter.

The case was heard before a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, consisting of Chief Justice Preethi Padman Surasena, Justices Yasantha Kodagoda and Priyantha Fernando.

In delivering the judgment, Justice Yasantha Kodagoda stated that the Colombo Municipal Council had taken steps to dump waste at the Meethotamulla Pothuvil Kumbura site.

The judgment notes that the illegal dumping of garbage caused a major disaster in 2017 when the relevant garbage mound collapsed.

Accordingly, from 2009 to 2017, the illegal dumping of waste in the area violated the fundamental human rights of the residents guaranteed under Article 12(1) of the Constitution by the Colombo Municipal Council and the Kolonnawa Urban Council.

Furthermore, by allowing the dumping of waste on about two acres of land in the area, the Urban Development Authority also violated fundamental human rights of residents, according to the judgment.

The judgment also stated that the Western Province Waste Management Authority violated fundamental human rights of residents by failing to fulfill its constitutional responsibilities in relation to the illegal waste dumping process.

However, the judgment noted that since the respondents have already paid over Rs. 908 million as compensation to those affected by the disaster caused by the garbage mound collapse, the Court will not order further compensation in these cases.

The Bench emphasized that the major disaster arose due to negligence of the respondents, including the Colombo Municipal Council, and stated that they must regret these failures and ensure such situations do not recur.

In conclusion, the judgment recorded that Chief Justice Preethi Padman Surasena and Justice Priyantha Fernando disagreed with certain observations made by Justice Yasantha Kodagoda in paragraph 116 of the judgment.