Search Options

Judgment Search By Title

Displaying 7681-7700 of 8375 results.
Tahurul Karim @ Tahurul Karim Khan Chowdhury Vs. Abdul Hashim and others, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)


Ayaz Bahdaur Khan & others Vs. Abdus Sobhan & others, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)


Mainuddin Khan Vs. State, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)


Shamsun Nahar Begum on behalf of the detenu Khalequzzaman Vs. Bangladesh & others, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)


Abdur Rashid Vs. Govt. of Bangladesh, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)

Bangladesh Public Servant's (Retirement) Act, 1974; Section 9 (2)

Parliament is to regulate the service conditions of the public servants

Legislature has been given wide power to pass laws regulating the terms and conditions of service. It is the inherent right of the Parliament and for that matter of the supreme law-making body, to regulate the time of retirement of the government servants. How long the public servant would be continuing in service, is a matter to be determined by the State…………….(7)

It is true that the petitioner being in service of the Republic immediately before the commencement of the Constitution, is entitled to continue in that service on the same terms and conditions as were applicable to him immediately before such commencement. This protection does not divest the Parliament or the supreme law making body to regulate the conditions of service as in the instant case, fixing age of retirement. However, clause (b) sub-paragraph (2) of paragraph 10 makes it clear that the protection as mentioned in sub-paragraph (1) shall not prevent the making of any law varying or revoking the conditions of service (including remuneration, leave, pension rights and rights relating to disciplinary matters) of persons employed at any time before commencement of this Constitution or of persons continuing in the service of the Republic under the provisions of paragraph 10………......(8)

The authority while passing the order directed that the petitioner would not be entitled to leave preparatory to retirement. This direction is not permissible in a case of compulsory retirement. The right that accrued under section 9 of the Act cannot be denied to a government servant who is compulsorily retired under section 9(2) of the Act.

The order cannot be treated as one passed under section 10 of the Act. This part of the impugned order, that is, that he shall not be entitled to leave preparatory to retirement is bad in law and as such it cannot be sustained. The improved order minus the portion quoted above is found valid in law…….(13) 


Habibullah Vs. Govt. of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Land Administra¬tion & Land Reforms, Bangladesh & others, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)


Md. Nazimuddin Vs. The State, 1976, 5 CLC (HCD)


Aseruddin Sk Vs. Serajuddin Talukder and others, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)

Right of preemption under section 96 of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act is a statutory right and is to be exercised within the scope of the statute itself. There is no embargo in the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act that the right of pre- emption shall stand forfeited if a disqualified person is joined with the pre-emptor in an application for pre-emption…………..(7)

Section 96 of the Act is not applicable since the land transferred is a homestead. The pre-emptee is bound by recital made in the deed of transfer. The homestead being a part of the holding of a raiyat is not excluded from the operation of the section 96 of the Act…….. (9) 


M. A. Khalilullah and Abdul Hakim Vs. Government of Bangla¬desh and others, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)


Burmah Eastern Limited Vs. Assessing Officer, Narayanganj Range and others, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)


Abu Bakr Siddique Vs. M.V. Aghia Thalassini and others, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)


Sri Kripa Shindu Hazra on behalf of detenu Kalipada Hazra Vs. The State and others, 1977, 6 CLC (HCD)


Bangladesh Jute Corporation Vs. AB Jute Ltd, 2004, 33 CLC (HCD)


Ali Imam Vs. Executive Engineer, Gaibandha and others, 2005, 34 CLC (HCD)


Md. Faiz, Advocate of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh Vs. Ekramul Haque Bulbul, reporter of the Daily Prothom Alo And others, 2005, 34 CLC (HCD)


Md. Shahjahan and another Vs. Haji Yeaqub Ali Chowdhury and another, 1978, 7 CLC (HCD)


Khaled Ahmed Chowdhury Vs. State, 2005, 34 CLC (HCD)


Reazuddin (Md.) and another Vs. Government of Bangladesh and others, 2001, 30 CLC (HCD)

Opportunity for defence when mandatory

Withholding or cancellation of the result of the Petitioners without giving them an opportunity for defence is manifestly arbitrary and cannot be sustained……….........(47)

The Madrasha Board is directed to make a proper inquiry as to who are responsible for the alleged fake registration of the petitioners as early as possible within a period not exceeding 3(three) months, issuing proper notice to the petitioners and others concerned to show cause as to why they shall not be liable for the illegal fake registration and take appropriate action accordingly. The results of those petitioners, if any, who are found to be not liable for the fake registration must be published……………. (49) 


Nurul Haque (Md.) Vs. Anowara Begum and others, 2004, 33 CLC (HCD)


Muzaffar Hossain Sarker (Md.) Muzaffar Hossain Sarker (Md.) Vs. State, 2002, 31 CLC (HCD)