3
Judgment : Appellate Division
(If you feel problem with font, please, download Bangla font from Downloads Link)
 
Case Category : 
Case Type
Case Number
Year
Parties
Short Description
 

Case Number Parties Short Description
51 Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Works, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna Dhaka
52 Khalishpur Jute Mills Ltd. Vs Rajdhani Unnayan Kartipakkha
53 Managing Director, Rupali Bank Ltd., Head Office, Dhaka Vs Md. Shahrier Perves and others
54 National Bank Limited and another Vs M.R. Trading Company, represented by Alhaj Md. Mizanur Rahman and others
55 The State Vs. Professor Dr. Morshed Hasan Khan
56 Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University VS Dr. Zahidul Haq
57 Election Commissoin for Bangladesh VS Md. Golam Mostafa and others
58 Mohammad Alauddin
59 Mrs. Jahanara Hossain and others VS Surajit Kumar Das and others
60 The Public Service Commission VS Ripon Chandra Shil and others
61 Biman Bangladesh Airlines and others Vs. Al Rojoni Enterprise
62 Md. Hafizuddin Vs. Mozaffor Mridha being dead his heirs:
63 Bangladesh Railway, Dhaka Vs. Most. Monowara Begum and others
64 Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Public Works, Government of Bangladesh, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka
65 Monjur Morshed Khan and others Vs. Durnity Daman Commission(Anti Corruption Commission)and another
66 Parmalundra Joydhar Vs. Bhagirath Talukder and others
67 Government of Bangladesh and Allama Delwar Hossain Sayedee =Versus= Allama Delwar Hossain Sayedee and The Chief Prosecution (ICT)
68 Dr. Khairun Nahar and others vs Professor Dr. Iqbal Arshalan
69 Government of Bangladesh and others vs Advocate Asaduzzaman Siddiqui and others
70 Mohammad Zafar Iqbal and others: VS Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary of the Ministry of Liberation War Affairs, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka and others:
71 Bangladesh Bank vs East West Property Developments (Pvt.) Limited and others
72 Ataur Mridha @ Ataur vs The State
73 Government of Bangladesh represented by Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka vs Rangamati Food Products Ltd. and others:
74 Bangladesh Bar Council, represented by its Chairman, Dhaka Vs. A.K.M. Fazlul Kamir and others
75 Sohrab Ali Miah and others vs Bangladesh Sugar and Food Industries Corporation and another
76 M/S. Gramsico Limited vs Bangladesh Textile Mills Corporation
77 Mufti Abdul Hannan Munshi alias Abul Kalam and another vs The State Mufti Abdul Hannan Munshi alias Abul Kalam and another vs The State
78 Criminal Appeal No. 81 of 2016 Mufti Abdul Hannan Munshi alias Abul Kalam and another vs The State
79 The Vice Chancellor, University of Dhaka and others vs A.K.M.Muid and others The Vice Chancellor, University of Dhaka and others vs A.K.M.Muid and others
80 Abdullah Chowdhury and others vs Janata Bank Ltd. and others Abdullah Chowdhury and others vs Janata Bank Ltd. and others
81 Banichitra Pratisthan Limited and others VS Bilkis Begum and others
82 Bangladesh, represented by the Cabinet Secretary, Cabinet Division, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka. vs. Md. Ataur Rahman and others Bangladesh, represented by the Cabinet Secretary, Cabinet Division, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka. vs. Md. Ataur Rahman and others
83 Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs and others vs. Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST) represented by Dr. Shahdeen Malik and others Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs and others vs. Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST) represented by Dr. Shahdeen Malik and others
84 Civil Appeal 36/2011
85 President, Bangladesh Garments Manufacturers and Exporters Association(BGMEA) Vs. Bangladesh The BGMEA has constructed a fifteen storied commercial complex on the “BegunBari Khal” and “Hatir jheel lake” which is natural waterbody (cÖvK…wZK Rjvavi) as has been specifically admitted in the schedule to the transfer deed, Annexure-K-2 as well as in the government record and in the Master Plan of the Dhaka City, as Lake/Jolashoy/Doba. As such from the above provision of law, the class or the nature and character of the same cannot be changed nor can be used in any other manner/purpose nor can the same be leased out, rented or transferred by any body. The law further provides that any person changing the nature and character of such “Joladhar” (water body),in violation of section 5 of the said Act of 2000, shall be dealt with in accordance with law as provided in section 8. Since BGMEA has constructed the multi-storied commercial building upon the said waterbody in violation of the law such illegal construction/obstruction must be demolished for which the BGMEA or any other person, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, cannot claim any compensation as provided in Section8(2) of the Joladhar Ain 2000. ..........................................The petitioner is directed to demolish the building namely, “BGMEA Complex” situated on the waterbody of “Begunbari khal” and “Hatirjheel lake” at once, at its own costs, in default the RAJUK is directed to demolish the same within 90 days from the date of receipt of this judgment and realize the entire demolition costs from the petitioner, BGMEA.
86 Civil Appeal 8/2012 Civil Appeal 8/2012
87 Civil Appeal 83/2007
88 Civil Review Petition 189/2015
89 The State Vs. Advocate Md. Qamrul Islam, M.P. Minister, Ministry of Food and another We are unable to accept the unconditional apology offered by the contemnors taking into consideration that the contemnors are sitting Cabinet Ministers holding constitutional posts. They are oath bound to preserve and protect the Constitution. The impugned statements/comments/remarks made by them apparently show that they made those comments intentionally with the object of maligning and undermining the office of the Chief Justice and the highest Court of the country. Their statements are so derogatory and contemptuous that if they are let off any person will be emboldened to make similar statements/remarks/comments interfering with the administration of justice and also undermining the authority of this Court in the estimation of the people in general. The prayer for unconditional apology is, therefore, refused. The contemnors are found guilty of gross contempt of this Court.
90 Mir Quasem Ali vs The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka Bangladesh Mir Quasem Ali vs The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka Bangladesh
91 Wagachara Tea Estate Ltd vs. Muhammad Abu Taher and others Wagachara Tea Estate Ltd vs. Muhammad Abu Taher and others
92 Chairman, Rajdhani Unnayan Kartipakkha (RAJUK), Dhaka VS Manzur Ahmed @ Manzoor Ahmed and others Civil Appeal 81/2014 with Civil Appeal 82/2014, Civil Appeal 83/2014, Civil Review Petition 120/2014 and Criminal Petition 480/2015
93 Mir Quasem Ali v. The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka Bangladesh
94 Motiur Rahman Nizami vs The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka Bangladesh.
95 Md. Idrisur Rahman Government of Bangladesh and others vs Syed Shahidur Rahman and others CIVIL APPEAL NO.145 OF 2005 WITH CIVIL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.405 OF 2005
96 Motiur Rahman Nizami Vs The Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka, Bangladesh
97 Government of Bangladesh and others vs.The Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Barisal, represented by the Chairman, Barisal and another (From the Judgment and order dated 05.02.2009 passed by the High Court Division in Writ Petition No.2438 of 2004)
Judgment dated 15/12/2015
Points decided by the Court
1) Any person in the service of Republic or any statutory authority cannot seek judicial review in respect of terms and conditions of service or action taken relating to him as a person to such service including transfer, promotion, and pension rights, except :
a) in matters relating to challenging the vires of the law;
b) infringement of fundamental rights in which case also, there must be sufficient pleadings of such violation keeping in mind that such plea also can be taken in the tribunal because the constitution being the supreme law of the Country, it can be taken in aid by any Court/tribunal
2) The Administrative Tribunal shall be competent to deal with those matters and in appropriate cases of emergency; it can also pass interim order of injunction/stay subject to compliance of certain formalities.
3) The views taken in Mujibur Rahman 44 DLR (AD) 111 have been overruled.
4) If the action of the authority or order complained of in relation to the above matters are found to be coram non judice or without jurisdiction or is found malafide, judicial review is not available and the administrative tribunal can deal with these issues also. On this point, the decisions in Shaheda Khatun V. Administrative Appellate Tribunal, 3 BLC (AD) 155, Ehtesham Uddin V. Bangladesh, 33 DLR(AD) 154, Ismail Hoque V. Bangladesh, 34 DLR(AD) 125, Mostaque Ahmed V. Bangladesh, 34 DLR(AD)222 and Helal Uddin Ahmed V. Bangladesh, 45 DLR(AD)1 have also been overruled.
98 Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of land, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka vs. Abdul Hye and others CIVIL APPEAL NO.163 OF 2009
99 Government of Bangladesh and another vs. Md. Abul Kalam Azad and others CIVIL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.2532 of 2014
100 Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh and others VS Md. Kazemuddin Miah From the judgment and order dated 10.6.1999 passed by the High Court Division in Writ Petition No.2702 of 1996
This Site is Visited :