The Department of Wildlife Conservation has filed a case against the Department of Irrigation over the destruction of trees inside the buffer zone of Wilpattu National Park, NewsFirst reported on Saturday.
The case was filed at the Puttalam Magistrate’s Court under the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance. The trees stood near Nelumwewa in Eluwankulama.
A joint field inspection involving the Ministry of Environment found that around 110 trees had been burned and felled, among them:
| Species | Count |
|---|---|
| Kumbuk (Terminalia arjuna) — large trees | 61 |
| Bakmi (Nauclea orientalis) | 24 |
| Madan (Syzygium cumini) | 2 |
| Identified | 87 |
| Reported total | ~110 |
The three named species account for 87 of roughly 110 trees. NewsFirst does not say what the remaining two dozen were.
How the trees were destroyed
The Daily Mirror’s account, filed later on Saturday, supplies the causation NewsFirst’s version left open — and it is not deliberate felling.
The tank’s bund, which the Department of Irrigation manages, had been breached during Cyclone Ditwah and was undergoing rehabilitation. Soil was being excavated from the tank bed as part of that work. During the excavation, a fire spread through accumulated dry vegetation, burning the bases of the trees and causing them to collapse.
That reframes the incident. The trees were not cut down for the project; they were killed by a fire that the earthworks set off in dry ground litter, and then fell. The Daily Mirror does not say whether the fire was lit deliberately to clear vegetation or started accidentally during excavation — the distinction that would separate negligence from intent.
It also explains the site description. The Daily Mirror places the trees at Nelum Wewa in Parana Eluwankulama, Vanathavilluwa.
No prior approval or environmental recommendation had been obtained from either the Department of Wildlife Conservation or the Central Environmental Authority for the rehabilitation work, despite the tank sitting inside the ecologically sensitive buffer zone.
That is the substance of the case: not that the repair was unauthorised in itself, but that work inside a national park buffer zone proceeded without the consents that zone requires.
The inspection, and who ordered the prosecution
The joint field inspection took place on September 18, the day before the case was reported, following intervention by the Ministry of Environment. It brought together officials from the Central Environmental Authority, the Forest Conservation Department, the Department of Wildlife Conservation, the North Western Provincial Environmental Authority and several other state institutions.
The Ministry of Environment said state development projects would not be allowed to damage fragile ecosystems in violation of environmental law, and that legal action would be pursued against those responsible under the direction of Environment Minister Dr. Dhammika Patabendi, Deputy Minister Anton Jayakody and Ministry Secretary K. R. Uduwawala.
The ministerial direction matters here: this is not a departmental prosecution proceeding quietly, but one the Environment Ministry has publicly attached its own leadership to — against another government department.
One arm of the state prosecuting another
The proceeding sets two government departments against each other in a magistrate’s court, with a third — the Ministry of Environment — having supplied the inspection evidence. Police said the Wanathawilluwa Divisional Secretary has separately lodged a complaint about the incident.
It also illustrates a tension that will recur across the Ditwah recovery programme. Reconstruction of damaged irrigation works is urgent and is being pushed hard; a significant share of the infrastructure damaged by the cyclone sits in or beside protected land. Where speed and statutory clearance collide, this is what the collision looks like.
Kumbuk in particular is a riverine and tank-bund species valued for holding banks together — the trees felled to repair a bund are of the type that stabilise one.
What changed
This article was first published from NewsFirst’s report alone. A Daily Mirror filing later on Saturday has been added as a second source.
It closes two of the gaps flagged here originally: the joint inspection date (September 18) and how the trees were destroyed (a fire spreading through dry vegetation during excavation of the tank bed, rather than felling). It adds the named ministry officials directing the prosecution and the fuller site name.
Not reported
Neither outlet names any individual accused, says whether the case is against the Irrigation Department as an institution or against named officers, or gives the next court date. Neither reports the penalty range under the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance for the offences alleged.
Neither says whether the fire was set deliberately to clear vegetation or started accidentally — the central question now that the cause is known. The date of the fire itself is still unstated, as is the area affected.
Neither gives any response from the Department of Irrigation, or says whether restoration work at the site has been halted, whether the bund repair is complete, or what happens to the project while the case is pending.
It is not reported whether any replanting or remediation has been ordered, or whether other Ditwah repair sites inside protected areas are being reviewed for the same failure to obtain clearance. The three named species still account for only 87 of roughly 110 trees, and neither outlet identifies the remainder.
