Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh

ALL A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z



সার ডিলার নিয়োগ সংক্রান্ত সমন্বিত পদ্ধতি-২০০৬
Section/Order/Article/Rule/Regulation Head Note
Rule 8

Unauthorised members were present in taking decision in question and thus their presence have vitiated the appointment in question as they had no jurisdiction to remain present in the meeting to take decision.
The Appellate Division held that the learned Judges of the High Court Division observed that Major Nizam and three others not being authorised members as per Rule 8 of Rules of 2006 were present in taking decision in question and thus “their presence have vitiated the appointment in question as they had no jurisdiction to re-main present in the meeting to take decision. Appellate Division has heard the learned Deputy Attorney General and perused the connected papers including the impugned judgment. Appellate Division does not find any substance in the points raised. The High Court Division upon correct assessment of the materials on record arrived at a correct decision.
The Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Industry, Bangla-desh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka: -Vs.- Abul Bashar and others (Civil) 10 ALR (AD) 272-274 ....View Full Judgment