Writ Petitioner has acquired title in the case land
Since the land of Azizul Huq, the vendor of the writ petitioner has already been released by the Notification published in the Bangladesh Gazette on 11th November, 1999 and consequent thereupon as RAJUK in no way competent to lay any claim over the land of Azizul Huq, the vendor of the writ petitioner.
Rajdhani Unnayan Kartipakhya Vs. Nurul Haque Bhuiyan & Ors 12 BLT (AD)-47
Section-(f) and 2(h) Question of estoppels
We have seen that the preamble of the Town Improvement Act, 1953 provides for development, improvement and expansion of the capital of the Republic. Therefore we are in agreement with the view of the High Court Division that although under section 2(h) of the Town Improvement Act the RAJUK may alter the lay out plan this power must be exercised for the purposes of improvement. Conversion of parks and open spaces enjoyed by allotters of a plan township cannot be converted as residential plots. Conversion of such open spaces and parks into residential plots is not an improvement by any means and therefore exercise of such power is contrary to the purpose for which it is conferred under the Town Improvement Act, 1953.
RAJUK & Anr. Vs. Mohsinul Islam & Anr. (AD)-56
Section —93A(4) (h)
In that view of the matter there is absolutely no scope for any release of the requisitioned property by the Government. Even assuming that there may be some decision of the Board but that was not acted upon in accordance with law so as to release the property in favour of the original owners thereof.
Abdul Huq & Ors.Vs Government of Bangladesh & Ors 13 BLT (AD)194
Section- 93A(I), 93A(3) and 93A(4)(h)
Acquiring Authority Government on asking of Requiring body D.I.T. acquired property for requiring body D.I.T. —When Suit Property absolutely vested with Government free from all encumbrances as mandated by section 93A(4)(h) of The Town Improvement Act of 1953, The property which vested with the Government i.e. Dhaka Improvement Trust free from all encumbrances cannot at all vest subsequently with any other organ of the Government either Ministry of Works or Ministry of Industries under grab of abandoned property. —Suit property is acquired property of Government and it was legally leased out to Plaintiff Bank. Plaintiff Bank’s right, title, interest and possession on suit property had not been at all affected by Defendants-Respondent’s sale deeds, mutations and payment of rents.
Bangladesh Bank Vs. Saiyed Shohidul Haque & Ors 15 BLT (HCD)239
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.
Court of Wards Bhawal Raj Estate Vs. RAJUK 7BLT (AD)-304.