The petitioner even if is an accused in another criminal case shall not, according us, be debarred from seeking relief from this Court in an application under Article 102 of the Constitution, to challenge another order if the said order is found to be
without lawful authority or of no legal effect. Moreover, an action taken without lawful authority can be challenged, according to us, by an aggrieved person on an application under Article 102 of the Constitution, and the criminal case against him if nay or non appearance in the said criminal case shall not, according to us. debar him from seeking justice in this forum under
Article 102 of the Constitution.
Md. Shafiqul Islam Shimul Vs. Ministry of Homes Affairs 11 BLT(HCD)-386
The Customs authority as per provision of section 81 of the Act was required to make the provisional assessment final within the reasonable time. In respect of the consignments of the respondent the customs authority made provisional assessment in between July, 1991 and February, 1992, but till August 1997 the customs authority did not make the assessment
final although the authority had the materials before it for making the final assessment of duties and order levies on the imported goods of the respondent taking the value at US# 400 per Metric ton. The customs authority inspires of having the materials for making the provisional assessment final did not make final assessment till August. 1997 taking the value of the imported goods at US$ 400 per Metric ton. The customs authority inspire of having the materials for making
the provisional assessment final did not make final assessment till August. 1997 taking the value of the imported goods at US$ 400 per metric ton and thus the respondent was compelled to tile the writ petitions seeking direction for the refund of the excess amount of duties realized from him at the time of provisional assessment without basis. In our view in the background excess amount of duties realized against the goods imported by the respondent.
Bangladesh & Ors. Vs. Md. Salim Hossain 11 BLT (AD)-71
Nature of Certiorari — Admittedly respondent No. 1 has not prayed for his reinstatement in service with back wages, relief sought for is declaratory form and the Labour Court found that such relief is not available to the respondent even though he has a good case for directing reinstatement. It appears from the perusal of the record that the Labour Court found that the respondent has a case but because of wrong prayer no relief can be granted. The High Court Division on the other
hand granted relief by way of reinstatement. In view of the aforesaid decisions of this Court we hold that the High ‘ Court Division was not justified in passing the order of reinstatement of the respondent in service with 50% back wages. The High Court Division acted beyond jurisdiction.
B.T.C Ltd & Anr. Vs. Md. Azizul Huq & Ors. 11 BLT(AD)-84
Secure the ends of Justice for the fault of the petitioners, the respondent No. I should not suffer as he had only last chance to be admitted into M.S. Course (Urology) pursuant to the notification dated 4.1 1.1999 which was for one year only and accordingly allowing to pursuit him higher education in M.S. Course (Urology) on being admitted in the said Course even by increasing one seat if necessary by the authority as mentioned in the impugned order do not suffer from any illegality but the same is also warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case, in order to secure the ends of justice.
Dhaka Medical College Vs. Dr. Manzoor Rasheed Chowdhury & Anr. 11 BLT (AD)-129.
We find that while the petitioner submitted his application filling up the BPSC form No. 2 she indicated her preference for the police cadre and accordingly she was allowed to sit at the written examination and after she was successful in her written examination she was allowed to appear before the Viva Voce Examination. Board and after completion of the same successfully she was selected for the service. Selection of the petitioner was processed by computering the result of the written examination and the viva voce examination and long after her selection she-was informed that she did not fill up the form properly and legally and the selection was cancelled.
Held— The High Court Division has given correct and cogent reason to declare the cancellation order as illegal and without any legal effect.
Govt. of Bangladesh & Ors. Vs. Farida Yesmin 11BLT (AD)-94
Direction for refund of the amount claimed by the respondent.
Since the papers on the basis whereof the High Court Division has arrived at the definite finding that the petitioners owe to the respondent an amount of Tk. 4,56,000/- can in way be was be considered disputed materials or judgment sought to be appealed is called for.
A.D.C. (Rev) & Ors. Vs. Co-operative Society Ltd. 11 BLT(AD)-91
Article-102 Read with
Dhaka University Order, 1973, Article-52
When it is found that the election was conducted in derogation of the clear provision of law that election cannot be construed as an election as contemplated under the Statute and in such circumstances the election that was held and result published by
the Vice Chancellor can be questioned in Writ jurisdiction.
Dhaka University Vs. G. Ahmed Chowdhury & Ors. 11 BLT(AD)-222.
Natural Justice— Non-Supply of enquiry report along with the 2nd Show Cause notice violated the rule of Natural Justice.
BADC Vs. S. H. Bhuiyan & Ors 11 BLT (AD)-164
Appointment of Temporary Nikah Registrar by way of curtailing the area of the petitioner. Curtailment of the area of a Nikah Registrar is within the jurisdiction of the Government.
Monwar Hossian Vs. Govt. of the Bangladesh & Ors. 11 BLT(AD)-168
Article-102 read with
Securities and Exchange Commission
Rule, 1995 Rule-56(1)
Whether Show Cause Notice is required Having regard to the terms and conditions of the petitioner’s appointment letter and the provisions of law of Securities and Exchange Commission Rule we find that the High Court Division committed no illegality in holding that the impugned order being a pure and simple order of termination without any stigma. In such view of the matter, we find that no show cause notice is required to be issued in the matter of such removal by way of termination.
Khaled Ahmed Vs. S. E Commission & Ors 11 BLT (AD)-173
Not Maintainable – In the instant case the impugned order has been passed in the execution proceeding and the petitioner could avail the provision of order 21 rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure in setting aside the auction sale on ground of material irregularity and fraud alleged by any of the party to the execution proceeding arising out of judgment and decree passed under the Ain as the same could have been adequately dealt with under the said provision, and in the facts and
circumstances of the instant case the writ jurisdiction is not maintainable for deciding the question of fraud and material irregularity ill publishing and conducting the sale, which are essentially a question of fact to the determined on evidence and could not be conveniently dealt with in writ jurisdiction.
M/S Antibiotic Stores & Ors Vs. Artha Rin Adalat & Ors 11 BLT(AD)-133
Not Maintainable-The respondent prayed for a declaration that the impugned order/ supersession dated 18.12.1994 passed by the Ministry of Environment and Forest should be declared to have been passed without lawful authority and also prayed for considering the seniority of the petitioner while promoting officers to the posts of Deputy Conservator of Forests. The prayer portion indicate that the writ petition is in respect- of terms and conditions of service— we are of the view that the
writ petition as filed is not maintainable.
Ministry of Environment of Forest & Anr. Vs. Shah Md. Nurul Islam. 11 BLT(AD)-146