TOWN IMPROVEMENT ACT, 1953

(XIII OF 1953)

Employees of DIT—Dacca
Improvement Trust is not a commercial or industrial establishment and its
employees are not workers within the meaning of Employment of Labour (Standing
Orders) Act, 1965—Such employees cannot enforce the provisions of section 18 of
that Act relating to sub-sistence allowance pending inquiry into misconduct in
a proceeding under section 34 of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969—Terms and
conditions of such employees are regulated by Town Improvement Act and rules
framed thereunder.

Chairman, DI. T. and another Vs. Chairman, 2nd Labour Court and
another, 1BLD (AD) 462

Sectious—38, 39 and 40

Jurisdiction—No
exclusive jurisdiction of Dacca Improvement Trust or Dacca Municipal
Corporation for land reclamation, land development and housing etc—There powers
are permissive in nature subject to approval of the Government—Paurashava
Ordinance, 1977 (XXVI of 1977), Ss. 95 and 96.

Md. Ismail and others
Vs. Bangladesh and others, 1 BLD (HCD) 407.

Town
Improvement Act, 1953

Section- 101(1)

Under
Section 101(1) of the Town Improvement Act, 1953 it is the absolute right of
RAJUK to deal with the property acquired for them. The release in favour of the
owners was rightly done. [Para-6]

Court of
Wards Bhawal Raj Estate Vs. RAJUK 7 BLT (AD)-304.

Town
Improvement Act, 1953

Sections—22,
29(1), 79(2), 93A and 93B

Acquisition
and Requisition of Immovable Property Ordinance, 1982 (II of 1982)

Section—12

Sub-section
(1) of Section 29 of the Town Improvement Act as amended by section 22 of the
Town Improvement (Amendment) Act, 1953 empowers RAJTJK to dispose the acquired
land by a sell, lease, exchange or otherwise and sub-section (2) of section 79
provides that acquisition of any land or interest in land for any scheme shall
be deemed to be acquisitioned for public purpose within the meaning of the
Acquisition and Requisition of Immovable Property Ordinance, 1982 and
provisions of the Ordinance shall apply to all proceedings relating to
acquisition of property for such purpose. Inspite of repeal of section 93A and
93B of the 1953 Act the proceeding taken under these sections shall not affect
such proceeding although section 12 of 1982 Ordinance provides that where
compensation has not been paid or deposited within one year from the date of
the decision of the Government the proceeding of acquisition shall stands
abated. Claim for release of unutilized acquired land is not a vested right and
nor failure of the requiring body to utilize the land acquired within 3 years
from the date of acquisition in view of the decision of the Government creates
no constitutional or legal right in the petitioners who claim for release of
such land. Non-payment of compensation within one year from the date of
decision of the Government for acquisition of land as contemplated under
section 12 of the Ordinance does not render such land liable to be released.
Section 12 is not applicable to the facts of the instant cases which was
started long before the Ordinance came into force in view of the provision of
amended section 79 of the 1953 Act as no retrospectively can be read into
section 12 of the Ordinance of 1982.

Md. Jamir
Ali and others Vs The Secretary, Ministry of Land & ors., 20 BLD (AD) 245.

Town
Improvement Act [XIII of 1953]

Violation of
building rules and the sanctioned plan punishable—So also violation of
neighbour’s interest—In the present case the duty of the defendants is to keep
vacant space or to make constructions according to the Building Rules and the
building plan sanctioned by authority. Violation of the Building Rule and the
sanctioned plan are punishable under the Town Improvement Act. Similarly, if
these violations touch the interest of the neighbours, they are also actionable
at the instance of the neighbours.

A Hakim Khan
vs Sufia Khatun 39 DLR 275.

—Failure to
comply with the Building Rules as well as with the plan sanctioned, is an infringement
amounting to tort.

A Hakim Khan
vs Sufia Khatun 39 DLR 275.

Section 2(t)—

It is an
obligation of the RAJUK to provide parks, open spaces, play grounds or similar
amenities. It cannot deprive the residents of an improvement scheme from such
facilities on the plea of providing residential plots to the growing number of
town dwellers.

Mohsinul
Islam vs Rajdhani Unnayan Kartripakkha and others 52 DLR 12.

Section 2(h)—

Conversion
of parks and open spaces enjoyed by allottees of a plan township cannot be
converted as residential plots.

Rajdhani
Unnayan Kartripakhya and another vs Mohsinul Islam and another 53 DLR (AD) 79.

Sections 22 & 23 (as amended), 29, 79(2), 93A & 93B—

Non—payment
of compensation within one year from the date of decision of the Government for
acquisition of land as  contemplated
under section 12of1982 Ordinance does not render such land liable to be
released in that section 12 is not applicable to the facts of the instant cases
which were started long before the Ordinance came into force in view of the
provision of amended section 79 of the 1953 Act as no retrospectivity can be
read into section 12 of the 1982 Ordinance.

Jamir Ali
(Md) and others vs Secretary, Ministry of Land & others 52 DLR (AD) 176.

Section 23—

Unless a
different intention appears in the repealing Act the repeal of any enactment
shall not affect any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy as if the
repealing Act had not been passed.

Jamir Ali
(Md) and others vs Secretary, Ministry of Land and others 52 DLR 125.

Section 93A & 93A (repealed)—

In spite of
repeal of sections 93A and 93B of the Act the pending acquisition of the
disputed land shall be continued under the aforesaid provisions as if those
have not been repealed and the provision of section 12 or other provisions of
Acquisition and Requisition of Immoveable Property Ordinance shall not apply to
the acquisition proceedings started under section 93A of the Act.

Jamir Ali
(Md) and others vs Secretary, Ministry of Land and others 52 DLR 125.

Sections 52 & 74—

The writ
petitioner allottee of the adjacent plot has no legal right to resist creation
of new plot or sub—plots and alloting those to others. The writ petition is bad
for defect of parties as the allottees have not been made parties to the
petition.

Syed Abdur
Rahim vs Secretary, Ministry of Works, Government of Bangladesh and others 53
DLR (AD) 106.

Section 93A(3)—

The land
being still under requisition there cannot be a valid ground for declaring the
proposed allotment illegal only because the land has been kept unutilized for a
long time without issuing acquisition process.

Sadeque
uddin Ahmed vs RAJUK 46 DLR 205.

Section 93A(3)—

The land in
question having been requisitioned for the purpose of acquisition and
possession delivered to the requiring body, in spite of the fact that no
Gazette Notification has yet been published vesting title in the land, may use
the property as may appear to it to be expedient.

Jamir Ali
(Md) and others vs Secretary, Ministry of Land 52 DLR I 25.

Section 100(1)—

Under
section 101(1) of the Town Improvement Act, 1953 it is the absolute right of
the RAJUK to deal with the property acquired and they have sufficient authority
to release the land to the owners.

Bhawal Raj
Estate Court of Wards vs Rajdhani Unnayan Kartri­pakkha and another 51 DLR 462.