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 Criminal Appeal No. 81 of 2016 Mufti Abdul Hannan Munshi alias Abul Kalam and another vs The State
52 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
53 Abdullah Chowdhury and others vs Janata Bank Ltd. and others Abdullah Chowdhury and others vs Janata Bank Ltd. and others
54 Banichitra Pratisthan Limited and others VS Bilkis Begum and others
55 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
56 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
57 Civil Appeal 36/2011
58 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.
59 Civil Appeal 8/2012 Civil Appeal 8/2012
60 Civil Appeal 83/2007
61 Civil Review Petition 189/2015
62 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.
63 Mir Quasem Ali vs The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka Bangladesh Mir Quasem Ali vs The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka Bangladesh
64 Wagachara Tea Estate Ltd vs. Muhammad Abu Taher and others Wagachara Tea Estate Ltd vs. Muhammad Abu Taher and others
65 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
66 Mir Quasem Ali v. The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka Bangladesh
67 Motiur Rahman Nizami vs The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka Bangladesh.
68 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
69 Motiur Rahman Nizami Vs The Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka, Bangladesh
70 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.
71 Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of land, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka vs. Abdul Hye and others CIVIL APPEAL NO.163 OF 2009
72 Government of Bangladesh and another vs. Md. Abul Kalam Azad and others CIVIL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.2532 of 2014
73 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
74 Allama Delwar Hossain Sayedee Vs The Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Chief prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka, Bangladesh
75 The State v. Mr. Swadesh Roy and another
76 The State vs Dafader Marfoth Ali Shah and others
77 Ali Ahsan Muhammad Mujahid vs The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka, Bangladesh
78 Salauddin Qader Chowdhury vs The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka, Bangladesh
79 Ali Ahsan Muhammad Mujahid vs The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka, Bangladesh
80 Salauddin Qader Chowdhury vs The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka, Bangladesh
81 CONTEMPT PETITION NO.19 OF 2015 (Author of the article-The Daily Janakantha)
82 Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST) and ors vs Govt. of Bangladesh and ors
83 For reviewing the Judgment by Muhammad Kamaruzzaman passed in Criminal Appeal No. 62 of 2015
84 Muhammad Kamaruzzaman VS The Chief Prosecutor, International Crimes Tribunal, Dhaka, Bangladesh
85 Judgment on Benami Transaction
86 Judgment on Fatwa
87 CRIMINA REVIEW PETITION NOS.17-18 OF 2013.
88 The International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973
89 Environment/Housing
90 Commutation_of_Death_Sentence
91 Civil Appeal No 48 of 2011 7th Amendment
92 Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution
93 Amendment of Plaint
94 Appointment of receiver in partition suit
95 Parliament Election- Bank Loan defaulter/Bill defaulter
96 C.A. 148-49/2007 - Specific Performance of Contract.
97 Civil Petition No 640-641/2011
98 Civil Appeal 294-98/2003
99 Negotiable Instruments Act
100 C.A. 139/2003- Muslim Marriage.
This Site is Visited :