Leadership Training for University Entrants - Friday Forum

UTeachers Blog

The Friday Forum 2, Greenlands Avenue, Colombo 5, Sri Lanka
E-Mail; chandraj111@gmail.com
Telephone; 0773634444
Fax; 2504181

9th June 2011

FRIDAY FORUM - PRESS RELEASE-

Leadership Training for University Entrants.

The Friday Forum makes this statement in a spirit of democratic dialogue on the above issue, which we believe is of concern to all citizens. This programme has been introduced by the Ministry of Higher Education in a military environment under the leadership of the Ministry of Defence. According to the letter sent to students they may be offered a place in the national university system and will be expected to produce a certificate of completion which suggests that it is compulsory. The decision in the Supreme Court dismissing, without stating reasons, all the petitions against the programme, has made it all the more important to have a public discussion on its relevance and impact on the university system. The Friday Forum expresses its deep concern in regard to both the manner in which this programme has been developed and implemented, and the very concept of such leadership training outside the university system.
We wish to emphasise the following:

1. This programme has been imposed on universities and university students by the Minister of Higher of Education in a manner which violates the Universities Act No.16 of 1978 (as amended). Part VII of this Act deals with “The Authorities of a University,” and refers to the Council, the Senate and the Faculties. The Senate is the academic authority, which makes all decisions on academic programmes. According to Section 20 of the Act the power of the Minister to issue directives to the Universities Grants Commission is extremely limited, referring to finance, university admissions and medium of instruction, and in regard to investigations and responses to crises in administration or the functioning of universities.

2. The Ministry has no legal authority to formulate and implement programmes or courses for university students. Such programmes necessarily come within the purview of the university academic authorities. Under the circumstances development and implementation of such a programme without the approval of these bodies violates accepted procedures of university governance.

3. The UGC is authorised to determine admission but is required to consult universities regarding any teaching courses and programmes. It appears that the UGC too has either been sidelined in presenting this programme or it has failed to fulfil its responsibilities to consult with universities. It is deeply disturbing that a leadership programme for new entrants which has not been considered by the relevant university authorities has been introduced on the basis of a unilateral decision by the Ministry.

4. We certainly do not object to leadership training for students in the national university system. In fact, all students should be exposed to opportunities for personality development throughout their education. However, such programs have to be designed and presented by the universities in keeping with their norms and standards on teaching and learning, and academic freedom. Most universities, following the practice in such institutions of higher education all over the world, already conduct orientation programmes including English programmes for new entrants. The Ministry should be able to resource further upgrading of such programmes.

5. In some countries all youth between certain ages may be required to undergo periods of military training, but we are unaware of any other country where such training is a pre-condition for university admission. Military type training is founded on a system of regimentation. University education is meant to encourage independent learning discussion and argument with tolerance and respect for disagreement and viewpoint difference. In contrast, in the military and allied kinds of training, the emphasis is on command and control, action without disputation, except among the high command.

6. Universities are seats of higher learning where students not only study a curriculum but are also encouraged in critical thinking and a search for knowledge. While the special skills and capacities of the military should be appreciated and military discipline is obviously essential for the purposes of an army, it is not the form of leadership training appropriate for young people who would later play a role as civilians in the country’s development. The concepts of academic freedom and university autonomy provide the foundation of the teaching and learning environment in universities throughout the Commonwealth. They have not been considered idealistic and antiquated norms that have no relevance to market economies or in meeting the challenges of development or the growth of information technologies. Encouraging military style leadership skills, regimentation and behaviour patterns, is contrary to core values of freedom of thought, opinion and expression, and the value of dissent which all universities should strive to inculcate in their students.

7. These values, and the fundamental rights of students and teachers that are embedded in them, have been recognised in the Supreme Court Determination of 1999 of the Universities Act (Amendment) Bill in a judgement which was delivered by three judges including then Justice Shirani Bandaranayake. It is jurisprudence of this nature in the Supreme Court that confirms the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution which can create an appropriate environment for university education. The dismissal of cases challenging the 18th Amendment, the Local Government Bill and the Pensions Bill, and the recent petitions on the leadership programme must not prevent us as citizens from hoping that the foundation laid in earlier jurisprudence protecting fundamental rights will not be diluted.

8. Officials in the Ministry have made public statements that this military training will help new university entrants to resist the degrading practice of ragging. The ragging culture has in fact spread to and is embedded in many schools and public institutions in this country. In 1998 the late Minister of Higher Education, Richard Pathirana, helped to introduce the Prevention of Ragging Act. Some Universities and Faculties now assist the police to enforce the Act, and they have domestic disciplinary procedures as well as programmes to respond to and prevent ragging. The current ad hoc programme encourages an aggressive response to ragging, rather than focusing on prevention. This may undermine university efforts at preventing and responding to ragging while increasing the risk of violence between student groups.

9. The curriculum of the training programme obtained by the Friday Forum after some effort reveals extremely problematic aspects. No mention is made of the authority responsible for the curriculum but a prominent photograph of the Defence Secretary on the cover of the study guide suggests authorship by the Defence establishment. The predominant focus is on instilling discipline and self-confidence through military regimentation including a five-kilometre walk to be completed in 45 minutes irrespective of individual physical fitness or the widely disparate facilities for sports and physical training in the schools from which the students come.

10. What is more problematic is the content of the module on history and national heritage. The topics are, in order, the arrival of the Aryans, foreign invasions, (who the foreigners are is not clear) and the development of Sinhalese kingdoms. “National heritage” focuses exclusively on prominent cultural symbols of the majority Sinhala community such as Sigiriya, the Temple of the Tooth and the Aukana Buddha statue with none from other communities. Subjecting new university entrants who may well become future leaders of this country to a course which focuses exclusively on the majority community, undermines all the official statements on national reconciliation after three decades of civil strife. If this is an officially sanctioned method of national reconciliation what hopes do we have for a peaceful conflict free future in this country?

11. On the whole the curriculum seems to discourage tolerance for viewpoint difference, and sensitivities for the pluralism and diversity of our country. Regimentation, military discipline and taking pride in a majoritarian version of national heritage and history are what seem to be envisaged as the ideal model of leadership. It is of interest to note that in a group exercise on world leaders the suggested world famous leaders are Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, King Dutugemenu, Anagarika Dharmapala, Mahinda Rajapakse, Veera Puran Appu, and Ranasinghe Premadasa.

We urge the Minister of Higher Education to recognise and respect the autonomous roles of academics and academic authorities in the Higher Educational System under the Universities Act of 1978. We hope that he will refrain from imposing arbitrary decisions on the university system in this manner. We also wish to remind university academics and administrators that it is their duty and responsibility as members of university authorities such as Faculty Boards, Senates and Councils to safeguard and nurture academic autonomy and the integrity of the university system. It is only active engagement and interest on their part that will help to prevent continuous infringements on academic freedom and university autonomy. We need a State university system which up to now has given equitable access to higher education even as universities meet the many challenges faced in achieving high standards of excellence in all universities and disciplines of study. Unless these negative trends are resisted Sri Lanka may well become the “knowledge hub” of Asia, not through a balanced public private mix, but through exclusive privatisation that will replace decades of a valued public education system.



Jayantha Dhanapala

and

Professor Savitri Goonesekere


On behalf of Friday Forum, the Group of Concerned Citizens:
Mr. Jayantha Dhanapala, Professor Savitri Goonesekere, Rt. Reverend Duleep de Chickera, Professor Gananath Obeyesekere, Ms. Manouri Muttetuwegama, Professor Arjuna Aluwihare, Dr. Camena Gunaratne, Ms. Suriya Wickremasinghe, Mr. Ahilan Kadirgamar, Mr. Lanka Nesiah, Mr. J.C. Weliamuna, Dr. A. C. Visvalingam, Dr Stewart Motha, Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne, Dr. Deepika Udagama, Ms. Sithie Tiruchelvam, Ms. Shanthi Dias, Dr. Selvy Thiruchandran, Professor Siri Hettige, Dr. Devanesan Nesiah, Dr. G Usvatte-aratchi, Ms. Dhamaris Wickramasekera, Mr. Daneshan Casiechetty, Mr. Prashan de Visser, Mr. Chandra Jayaratne,

Daily Mirror Speaks Up - University Lecturers Under Paid

විශ්වවිද්‍යාල ප්‍රතිපාදන කොමිසමේ සාමාජික සංඛ්‍යාව වැඩිවෙයි

Divaina

රනිල් ධර්මසේන

විශ්වවිද්‍යාල ප්‍රතිපාදන කොමිෂන් සභාවේ සාමාජික සංඛ්‍යාව වැඩි කිරීමට රජය තීරණය කර ඇත.

ඒ අනුව කොමිෂන් සභාවේ මෙතෙක්‌ හතක්‌ව පැවැති සාමාජික සංඛ්‍යාව පහළොව දක්‌වා වැඩි කිරීමට ඇමැති මණ්‌ඩලයේ අනුමැතිය ලැබී තිබේ.

මෙයට අමතරව විශ්වවිද්‍යාලවල පාලක සභාවල සාමාජික සංඛ්‍යාවද වැඩිකෙරේ.

නීති, මූල්‍යතත්ත්ව සහතික, රාජ්‍ය නොවන උසස්‌ අධ්‍යාපන, තෘතීය අධ්‍යාපන, වෘත්තීය, රාජ්‍ය හා පෞද්ගලික මෙන්ම උසස්‌ අධ්‍යාපන අමාත්‍යාංශයද නියෝජනය වන පරිදි විශ්වවිද්‍යාල කොමිෂන් සභාවේ කටයුතු පුළුල් කිරීමට මෙමගින් පියවර ගැනේ.

මේ සඳහා 1978 අංක 16 දරන විශ්වවිද්‍යාල ප්‍රතිපාදන කොමිෂන් සභා පනත හා ඊට අදාළ 1985 අංක 07 දරන (සංශෝධිත) පනත හදිසි පනතක්‌ සේ සලකා සංශෝධනය කිරීමට නියමිතය.

උසස්‌ අධ්‍යාපන ඇමැති එස්‌. බී. දිසානායක මහතා මීට අදාළ කැබිනට්‌ පත්‍රිකාව ඇමැති මණ්‌ඩලයට ඉදිරිපත් කර ඇත.

Leadership training programme :

Daily News

First stage ends on June 11

Hemanthi GURUGE

The first stage of the leadership training programme for new undergraduates will end on June 11. The second stage will commence on June 17. Higher Education Ministry Secretary Dr Sunil Jayantha Navaratne said.
The leadership programme is being conducting at 28 centres throughout the country. Around 82.5 percent applicants have participated in the first stage of the programme. It is believed that at least 10,000 will participate in the second stage of the leadership programme.

It will include 6,000 males and 4,000 females.

The second stage of the programme is to be held at the Naval Training Centre in Medawachchiya and Sir John Kotelawala Defence Academy. Letters have been sent to students regarding the programme. Students who have not received their letters, can obtain details over the Higher Education Ministry website.
He said that arrangements have been made to provide transport facilities to students who have completed the first stage of the leadership training programme.

All students participating in the second stage should report to the training centres on June 16 before 6.30 pm.

Military Training for University Students

The Island

June 9, 2011, 12:00 pm

There is much ‘ha ho’ regarding the three weeks military training for those entering a university. It is a matter of three weeks and it would not interfere with the university curriculum. G. A. D. Sirimal, who wrote to ‘The Island’ on 27th May, questions whether military training is suitable for civilian leadership. I ask him, what has he got to say about the two years compulsory military service for all young men in the United States?

To my recollection, only former world champion boxer Mohammed Ali was exempted from military service on the plea that he was a Muslim Religious leader.

Of course, we have to consider whether such braining is worthwhile. Certainly, it would inculcate a sense of patriotism, sacrifice, discipline and punctuality. Not only will the students learn to be positive, but they will know how to act upon that positive feeling. These qualities, while causing a marked change in attitudes, will tend to make them aspire to be leaders in various fields. There is no better place than the military to instill these qualities.

Certainly scouting provides good training, but all students who enter a university will not be scouts. In any case, military training will lay more emphasis on discipline, courage and being methodical.

If the President too has the time to address these students before they leave the military school, it will be a real morale booster.

In the case of Muslim girls who wish to avoid this training, they may ask for exemption on religious grounds.

Jayatissa,
Nugegoda.

Leadership and Learning

The Island

June 9, 2011, 7:15 pm

"Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other."

~John F Kennedy, US President (1961-1963)

Provided they are satisfied that it has no ulterior motives, the current leadership training and positive development programme conducted by the Ministry of Higher Education in collaboration with the Ministry of Defence will find acceptance among all stakeholders, particularly students and parents. Of a number of interesting articles about the subject that I was able to read in The Island, two impressed me most: Major General (retired) Lalin Fernando’s "Leaders are not born – the army makes them" (Sunday Island of May 29, 2011) and Mr Rohan Fernando’s "Army leadership training" (The Island of May 25, 2011). The former gives an authoritative account of the training from the point of view of a sincere well-wisher who has been an experienced insider familiar with the practical processes involved, while the latter reminisces about some absorbing personal experiences that he enjoyed as a schoolboy on a cadet corps training course at Diyatalawa in the late 70’s; Mr Fernando ends his article with a request to parents: "Dear Parents, let your precious children be away from home for three weeks to find themselves." Major General Fernando quotes these words to preface his article . I don’t think anything more should be written to convince those who look askance at the ongoing leadership and positive attitude development programme. My purpose here is to offer some ideas about what is involved in it from an educational point of view.

But first, let me explain away any fears that this is going to be a kind of military training. The inclusion of the word "army" in the titles of the two articles mentioned above would be disconcerting to some, though it need not be so. The word might make them imagine that the young men and women enrolled for the course of training are going to be put through some dangerous combat exercises involving the use of firearms, grenades, etc. Both the authors have made it clear that nothing of the sort will happen. But the invocation of the military through the word "army" resonates with most of us of the older generation including the authors of the articles referred to, I’m sure: we involuntarily associate the army with a high standard of discipline, orderliness, honesty, bravery, and firmness. In the popular mind, ‘army training’ is automatically assumed to inculcate these qualities in the trainees.

Every year about 400,000 children start their formal education by finding admission to the school system. Annually, the number who sit the GCE (AL) averages around 200,000. The state universities can accommodate only about 20,000 of the successful candidates, which amounts to just 5% of the original 400,000. This year, the university intake is said to be in the region of 22,000. The whole group will be handled in two batches of roughly 10,000 each for the leadership and positive attitude development course. The programme will cost the government Rs 185 million. (I owe this information to ozlanka.com). It is for the first time in the history of university education in Sri Lanka that a leadership training camp of this kind has been organized.

The designers of the ongoing leadership and attitude development programme aim to free the new students from what they call the "GCE (AL) mindset". These students are the latest crop of university undergraduates produced by a largely rote-learning based, examination-oriented education system, which is in need of a radical overhaul. Most of them, if not all, must have attended private tuition classes that their parents managed to pay for. There is no doubt that private tuition providers are meeting an important national educational need, and the students are not wrong to make use of their services. At the same time the state university system cannot accommodate all those who pass the examination, and as a result, it has to restrict the intake to manageable limits by raising entry requirements. This leads to competition among the university aspirants for the limited number of places available in the system. It is this narrow individualistic competition which the private tutors feed. This sort of educational environment is not likely to contribute to the realization of the ultimate goal of education, which is the development of self-reliant, outward looking, socially collaborative seekers after knowledge, and responsible, productive, well adjusted citizens ready to take up leadership in society.

Who is a leader? Is a leader born or made? Many of us who are usually not too worried about fine definitions are able to tell a leader from a non-leader, and this ability may be due to our intuition, experience, or education. On the basis of this common familiarity with what kind of persons are deemed to be leaders, and how hard to come by they usually are, some people say that leaders are born, not made, and express great scepticism about the prospect of training persons to be leaders.

There are born leaders, just as there are born physicians, born teachers, born orators, and born athletes, to suggest a few examples. We call certain people born cricketers, born musicians, born physicists etc in the sense that individuals described by those terms possess a special innate ability (to learn) to perform activities relevant to their fields better than their peers in the same circumstances.

In any field of activity, we use skills. There may be among us persons with a natural flair for performing tasks involving special talents. But this doesn’t mean that everything should be left to be accomplished by those individuals while the others are just idly waiting by. Such a thing is unthinkable in the real world. What normally happens is that skills are acquired through learning and practice. The ability to lead is also a skill. It’s no ordinary skill. It’s in fact a complex set of skills. Since any skill can be learned, leadership can be learned too. This means that leaders are more often made than born.

Again, there might be objectors saying "But, should everybody become a leader? If everyone is a leader, where are the followers for them to lead? Though not every individual at whatever level of society they happen to be (school, university, workplace, village, city and so on) will be required to become a designated leader, they should be ready to assume that responsibility if and when the need arises. In a well governed, egalitarian, democratic society free from discrimination and disharmony, every citizen should be as ready to lead as to be led for the common good. Older readers might remember these lines from popular singer Victor Ratnayake’s hit song "api okkoma rajawaru" of the latter half the 70’s decade: "api okkoma rajawaru okkoma wesiyo – thun sinhalayama naedayo" "We are all kings; we are all subjects – All of us of the tri-Sinhale are relatives (i.e. all Sri Lankans are of one family, of one blood)". The Leadership and Positive Attitude Development programme that has been launched by the government may be seen as a significant step towards achieving that ideal society.

It is only when two or more people gather to accomplish a common task that (the need for) a leader emerges. The leader guides the group (of two or more) towards arriving at a set goal by forging it into an efficiently functioning unit. Experts say that leadership is a group property; excellent leadership demonstrates itself through the excellent performance of the group.

Bela Banathy (1919-2003), a Hungarian-American linguist and systems scientist, was the founder of White Stag Leadership Development, a non-profit leadership training programme in the US. His leadership training model for youth was adopted throughout the country. The thesis Banathy wrote as a part of his Master’s degree in counselling psychology at San Jose State University (where he later became a professor) was entitled "A Design for Leadership Development in Scouting" in which he identified 80 skills that go to make a leader. He condensed these into 11 competencies as follows:

* Getting and Giving Information

* Understanding Group Needs and Characteristics

* Knowing and Understanding Group Resources

* Controlling the Group

* Counseling

* Setting the Example

* Representing the Group

* Planning

* Evaluation

* Sharing Leadership

* Manager of Learning

Though Banathy describes these in detail, they may be taken as self-explanatory for our purposes. But "Knowledge of or the ability to manage the learning of any or several of these competencies does not a leader make. What makes a leader is the degree to which the competency is an integral characteristic of an individual and the degree to which it influences the individual’s behaviour or (and by inference, his values)".

Banathy also isolates three key functions for the leader: authority, responsibility, and accountability. Authority means the right to make decisions; responsibility is being assigned a goal to achieve; and accountability consists in accepting success or failure.

For someone who wants to make a difference in life, nothing is more important than a change in attitude. Attitude here means the way one thinks and behaves towards someone or something. Developing the right attitude is indispensable for a leader. The following five key principles have been enunciated by Orrin Woodward, who is co-founder of Team, a leadership development and training company as essential for a leadership aspirant to develop a positive disposition (Comments following the colon after each item are mine):

* Develop a thankful spirit: While intent on improving our situation in life, we need first to focus on the good things we already have, and feel happy. A popular Sinhala song has words which mean: "I lamented the lack of a pair of shoes until I saw a man without his legs"

* Be careful about your friends: Who doesn’t know the identical local equivalent of the American saying "If you hang out with dogs, you get fleas"?

* Focus on serving others: Too much concern with your own welfare makes you feel inadequate and insecure; sparing a thought for others’ problems and difficulties enables you to understand and deal with your own problems better, while helping a fellow human being.

* Stay active: A good way to maintain physical as well as mental health.

* Have a purpose: Having something to achieve makes your life more meaningful, organized, and exciting.

We all know about the special circumstances which led to the conceptualization and implementation of a leadership and attitude development programme like this at considerable cost to the state (which means the public). This is one sore issue that parents are anxiously waiting for politicians of all parties to help sort out in the national interest without trying to make political capital out of it. They should not stand in the way of this programme.

From the national integration point of view one can hardly imagine a better opportunity than this for the youth of the country to experience the warmth of their common humanity and their shared goals and aspirations as Sri Lankans. Quite rightly, the participants are prohibited from discussing politics or religion.

These young students, and probably even many of their parents, grew up in a country constantly plagued with insecurity and tension. As children they hardly had an opportunity to leave the protective shadow of their parents, and be on their own; entrenched tuition culture robbed them of "the half hour - That a child counts so much when saved from work", to adapt Robert Frost’s lines from his poem "Out, Out - " substituting ‘child’ for ‘boy’. They probably had little time to receive any kind of leadership or personality development guidance from their parents and teachers who, though, are invariably the foremost role models in that area in a child’s life.

While writing this today (7th June) I heard, as reported in Swarnavahini TV’s ‘Live at 12’ news broadcast on the Internet (I am writing from Australia), Higher Education Minister Mr S.B. Dissanayake declare quite confidently at a meeting in Kandy that the present batch of students, when they complete their university education at the end of four years, will be assured of employment with their mastery of English and computer; according to the Minister, the students currently following the leadership training programme, will be directed to 321 regional centres to receive English language and computer instruction, which they will supplement once they start university. The weaker half of the students (i.e. weaker in English and IT, presumably because of previous lack of opportunity to learn those subjects), who number 10,000, will be given additional coaching by American and local experts on a distance learning basis, and they will each get a free laptop for the purpose. With sufficient English and computer knowledge thus acquired they will be able to easily embark on an endless treasure hunt in the world of knowledge.

The follow-up study period after the leadership training will enable the freshers to brush up their English and computer skills in preparation for their life in the university. They will enter through the portals of academia with a sense of confidence that some of their seniors did not feel at the beginning. It will mostly be due to the training. However, among the senior students there must be many who didn’t actually need such training; it is equally likely that among this year’s selectees there are those who may be exempted from the course. But it is certain that no one would like to miss out on it.

However, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. If the senior students and the university authorities including the teachers cooperate the successful integration of the juniors into a happy learning environment without any untoward incidents creating unpleasantness among them won’t be a problem. It is then that the crème de la crème of the Sri Lankan youth for this year will be able to put to the test what they must have discovered about themselves (i.e. their talents, personal worth, potential, etc) during the leadership and positive attitude training course. That surely will be the dawn of a new era in the history of university education in this country.

Who is a leader? Is a leader born or made? Many of us who are usually not too worried about fine definitions are able to tell a leader from a non-leader, and this ability may be due to our intuition, experience, or education. On the basis of this common familiarity with what kind of persons are deemed to be leaders, and how hard to come by they usually are, some people say that leaders are born, not made, and express great scepticism about the prospect of training persons to be leaders.

Restraining order on acceptance of resignation letters extended Resignation of University Dept heads

The Island

June 9, 2011, 9:25 pm


By Chitra Weerarathne

The Court of Appeal yesterday extended, till July 1, 2011, the stay order, which restrained the University Authorities from accepting the letters of resignation submitted by Heads of Departments of the Ruhuna, Wayamba and Sri Jayewardenepura Universities.

The stay order will restrain the Heads of Departments from keeping off official duties.

The Court yesterday regularized the earlier stay order upto June 10, 2011 and extended it up to July 1, 2011. The notice issued on the respondent Vice Chancellor, Chancellor, the University Grants Commission and the Heads of Departments of the Ruhuna, Sri Jayewardenepura and Wayamba Universities is returnable on June 30, 2011.

M. A. Sumanthiran, appearing for the respondents said that when the Heads of Departments submit their resignation, they remain resigned, immediately. He said that the resigned Deans and Heads of Department cannot be forced to stay in office. He said that the stay order restraining the authorities from accepting the resignation was unfair, since the respondents were not noticed, thus, they were not noticed that the stay order could not be for more than 14 days.

He cited a Supreme Court determination which had said that you cannot force Deans, who have submitted resignations, to hold on to office. The respondents had filed a motion objecting to the stay order, which restrained the authorities from accepting the resignation. They said they were not noticed and heard.

Faiz Mustapha PC, appeared for the student who had petitioned the Court against the attempt of the Heads of Departments to resign.

He referred to Section 51 of the Universities Act, which says that a Head of a Department will remain in office for three years, unless removed or retired on schedule.

He said the students should not be held to ransom and the stay order was impeccable. The jurisdiction of the Court should not be eroded and there were no time constraints on the Court, he said.

Sanjeewa Jayawardene, associated his submissions with Mustapha’s. He said that a resignation is effective only if it is accepted. A resignation could not be unilateral. The orchestrated system to collapse the university system could not be allowed and should be prohibited by the Court. The stay order was perfect and defendable, he said. It should be extended, he said.

Counsel Maduranga Ratnayake said that the respondents had failed to place sufficient reasons to show why the interim order should be lifted. The petitioner was entitled to have the interim order extended till the final determination of the Writ Application.

The Bench comprised Justice Sathya Hettige (President) and Justice Upali Abeyratne.