Haji Nurul Islam Vs. Maina Miah and others, VII ADC (2010) 620

Case No: Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.2165 of 2009

Judge: Shah Abu Nayeem Mominur Rahman ,

Court: Appellate Division ,,

Advocate: Md. Khurshid Alam Khan,,

Citation: VII ADC (2010) 620

Case Year: 2010

Appellant: Haji Nurul Islam

Respondent: Maina Miah and others

Delivery Date: 2010-1-13

 
Supreme Court
Appellate Division
(Civil)
 
Present:
Mohammad Fazlul Karim J
Shah Abu Nayeem Mominur Rahman J
Md. Muzammel Hossain J
 
Haji Nurul Islam
…………………….........Petitioner
Vs.
Maina Miah and others
……………......Respondents
 
Judgment
January 13, 2010.
 
The respondents are directed to issue a Trade Organization Licence as per report dated 01.07.2007 submitted by the respondent No.6 and also as per direction given by this Court by the judgment and order dated 21.05.2007 in Writ Petition No. 7347 of 2005 positively within 30 (thirty) days without fail. The respondents are further directed to communicate this Court about the compliance of this Court’s order positively within 60 (sixty) days. …. (4)
It appears that because of leave petitioner the granting of Trade Organization License is being delayed as the authority could not take any step in view of the filing of the writ petition.         …. (7)
 
Lawyers Involved:
Md. Khurshid Alam Khan, Advocate, instructed by Md. Zahirul Islam, Advocate-on-Record-For the Petitioner.
Dr. A. K. M. Ali, Advocate, instructed by Nurul Islam Bhuiyan, Advocate-on-Record-For Respondent No.1.
 
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No.2165 of 2009.
(From the judgment and order dated 24.08.2009 passed by the High Court Division in Writ Petition No.6981 of 2007.)
 
JUDGMENT
 
Shah Abu Nayeem Mominur Rahman J.
 
Instant petition under Article 103 of the Constitution is for granting leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 24.08.2009 passed by the High Court Division in making the Rule absolute issued in Writ Petition No.6981 of 2007.
 
2. The respondent No.1 hereof filed the leave petition praying for a direction upon the respondent to issue required Trade Organization License as per report of the writ respondent No.6 and in the light of the judgment and order dated 21.05.2007 passed by the High Court Division in disposing of the Writ Petition No.7347 of 2005.
 
3. The facts, in short, are that two appli­cants, namely, Sunamganj Bus Minis Bus Micro Bus Malik Group and Sunamganj Zilla Sarak Paribahan Malik Samity Group filed applications for license under the Trade Organization Ordinance and in that connection earlier Writ Petition No.7347 of 2005 was filed in the High Court Division and the said writ petition was disposed of on contest with a direc­tion upon the writ respondent No.6 there­of as under:
 
"It appears that the present petitioner filed an application before the con­cerned authority for issuance of Trade Organization License which is pend­ing before the licensing authority and on the application filed by Respondent No.7 a report was called for from the Deputy Commissioner, Sunamganj by the Senior Assistant Secretary of the concerned Ministry by a letter dated 10.04.2005. Thereafter the impugned letter dated 10.10.2005 was issued, not suo-moto by the Deputy Commissioner, Sunamganj but as per direction of the concerned authority, which is evident from Annexure-A and B. The applica­tion filed by the present petitioner is pending before Respondent No.6 whereas the application filed by the respondent No.7 is lying with Respondent No.1 for disposal. As per the Ordinance, Respondent No.6 is the competent authority for taking a decision in granting Trade Organization License in favour of any organization. We are of the view that it would be fair if both the applica­tions are placed before Respondent No.6 along with all relevant docu­ments and reports for his perusal and decision in accordance with law."
 
4. Accordingly the matter was considered by the Ministry of Commerce and as the aforesaid two groups could not come to an agreement the Ministry informed the groups that no license can be given to any of the group, vide memo No.বাম/টিও-১/১(২৩)২০০৪/২০৩ dated 01.08.2007 and challenging the aforesaid memo the Writ Petition No.6981 of 2007 was moved before the High Court Division and the Rule was heard and disposed of on contest in making the Rule absolute, with the fol­lowing direction:-
 
"The respondents are directed to issue a Trade Organization License as per report dated 01.07.2007 submitted by the respondent No.6 and also as per direction given by this Court by the judgment and order dated 21.05.2007 in Writ Petition No.7347 of 2005 pos­itively within 30(thirty) days without fail. The respondents are further directed to communicate this Court about the compliance of this Court's order positively within 60(sixty) days."
 
5. Challenging the aforesaid decision of the High Court Division the petitioner came up with the leave petition.
 
6. We have perused the leave petition and the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned Advocate appearing for the leave petitioner. The learned Advocate submitted that the impugned order as passed is bad as the same is not in accordance with the judg­ment and order passed in Writ Petition No.7347 of 2005 in that the authority instead of issuing a license has refused to issue license on the ground that the con­testing groups could not come to an agree­ment.
 
7. We do not find any substance in the sub­mission made by the learned Advocate in interpreting the portion of the direction given by the High Court Division in mak­ing the Rule absolute. It appears that the High Court Division has also directed the authority concern to issue the license within 60 days having regard to the report dated 01.07.2007 submitted by the writ respondent No.6 and the direction given earlier by the High Court Division in dis­posing of the Writ Petition No.7347 of 2005 which in our view is just and fair and is in accordance with law and equity. It appears that because of leave petitioner the granting of Trade Organization License is being delayed as the authority could not take any step in view of the fil­ing of the writ petition.
 
8. There is no illegality or any infirmity in the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court Division and hence we do not find any merit in the leave petition.
 
The petition is accordingly dismissed.
 
Ed.