A writ petition filed by national cricket captains Charith Asalanka and Dhananjaya De Silva challenging the arbitrary classification of Sri Lanka’s national cricketers as employees of Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) by the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) was taken up for support today before the Court of Appeal. The petition was heard by Acting President of the Court of Appeal, Justice M.T.M. Lafar, and Hon. Justice K. P. Fernando.
The petitioners argue that the IRD’s recent classification of cricketers as employees of SLC is arbitrary and unreasonable, particularly since national cricketers have historically been treated as independent service providers under contracts with SLC. In the petition, the cricketers sought a notice to quash the IRD’s decision and an interim order to suspend it.
A letter signed by 38 national cricketers, including Wanindu Hasaranga, Angelo Mathews, Maheesh Theekshana, Pathum Nissanka, and Kusal Mendis, was also presented before the court. The letter endorsed the petitioners’ legal challenge, highlighting the unlawful classification and supporting the cricketers’ claim for legal redress.
Counsel for the petitioners argued that the relationship between SLC and national cricketers has always been that of independent service providers. They pointed out that since the inception of contracts between players and SLC, cricketers have not been considered employees. The petitioners emphasized that both parties, SLC and the cricketers, have always intended for the players to remain independent contractors, not employees.
The court was further informed about the uncertainty in career progression for cricketers, as contracts are typically for only 12 months, and the terms, including renewal, tenure, and payment, are not guaranteed. It was also highlighted that the contracts include provisions for image rights, which are vested with the players, a necessity for the broadcasting and promotion of cricket events.
The cricketers also argued that the IRD’s decision, communicated to SLC in October 2024 and later conveyed to the players in February 2025, was made without providing the cricketers a chance to be heard or to make representations. The petitioners sought to challenge this decision, which was made arbitrarily and without proper consultation.
Moreover, the petitioners clarified that they were not seeking statutory entitlements such as EPF, ETF, or gratuity from SLC, nor were they trying to avoid tax obligations. In fact, the cricketers have been paying taxes through self-assessment for years. The Auditor General has also acknowledged that national cricketers are independent service providers, not employees.
Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC) expressed agreement with the factual position presented by the petitioners, confirming that cricketers are independent service providers, not employees. SLC indicated that they wished to make further submissions on the matter and would abide by any court order.
The court fixed the matter for a continued hearing on March 28, 2025, where the petitioners will continue their submissions and the respondents will present their replies.
Counsel Nishan Sydney Premathiratne, Shenali Dias, and Sidath Gajayanaka represented the petitioners, Charith Asalanka and Dhananjaya De Silva, while President’s Counsel Kuvera de Soyza, Pasindu Bandara, and Sajana de Soyza represented Sri Lanka Cricket. Deputy Solicitor General Manohara Jayasinghe appeared on behalf of the Inland Revenue Department.
Name of Author: Cricexec Staff
