Judicial review is the power of a court to review a statute, or an official action or inaction, for constitutionality. In many jurisdictions, the court has power to strike down a statute, overturn an official action, or compel an official action, if the court believes the constitution so requires. In some countries, courts also have authority to strike down statutes even though they are constitutional, for violation of basic principles of justice, or for contrariness to principles of a free and democratic society.The provisions in the Bangladesh Constitution that authorize the Court to ensure the functioning of guaranteed constitutional rights of individuals can only be classified as the power of ‘judicial review of executive acts’, not ‘judicial review of legislation’. Despite this, the Supreme Court at times proceeded even to examine the legality of constitutional amendment and, in the past, even declared a constitutional amendment invalid.

The competence of legislature though flows from the constitution; its legislation is subject to judicial review. [S.S. Bola v. S.D. Sardana, (1997) 8 SCC 522]

When an authority acts in accordance with the provision of a law which says that the decision made by that authority is final and the decision is a judicial decision, such a decision, though made final by fiction of law, is amenable to the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court Division under Section 115 C.P.C. [Bangladesh vs. Md.Mazibur Rahman, 14 BLD (HCD)362]

An authority exercising a power must exercise that power justly and fairly. Every piece of legislation or rules empowering an authority to exercise a power would contain the said duty to act justly. [Agragami Engineers Ltd. Vs. Bangladesh Bank and others, 13 BLD (HCD) 327]