Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh


Madrasha Education Ordinance, 1978 (IX of 1978)
Section/Order/Article/Rule/Regulation Head Note
Sections 3(1) and 17(2)(b)

Government cancelling recognition and withdrawing Monthly Payment Order (M.P.O)– Careful examination of the relevant law and the fact obtaining in the case shows that the Ministry of Education acted contrary to law and against the principles of natural justice inasmuch as the order impugned in the writ petition cancelling the recognition of the Madrasa not only contravenes sections 3(1) and 17(2)(b) of the Madrasa Education Ordinance, 1978 but also offends the principle of natural justice in cancelling the recognition of the Madrasa as no prior notice was issued calling upon the concerned Madrasa authority to explain their position. We therefore find the impugned judgment to have been passed in accordance with law. The appeal is accordingly dismissed without any order as to costs. …Ministry of Education =VS= Mowlana Wahiduzzaman, (Civil), 2020 (1) [8 LM (AD) 153] ....View Full Judgment

Section 4 (a)

This principle of legitimate expectation in the case of Soya-Protein Project Ltd. V. Secretary, Ministry of Disaster Management 22 BLD (2002) 378. The Appellate Division also accepted this principle in the case of the Chairman, Bangladesh Textile Mills Corporation V. Nasir Ahmed Chowdhury 22 BLD (AD) (2002) 199. The said principle was again considered and explained by this Division in Government of Bangladesh V. Md. Jahangir Alam (C.A. Nos. 45 to 47 of 2010).
This is how, even without any legal right,initsstrict conventional sense, an expectation may be bloomed into a legitimate one, capable of enforcement, although, there is no specific provision for it, still,the will and initiative of the Judges, made it possible from their sense of jurisprudence and justice for the people for whome the bell of justice always tolls.
Now the question of locus standi. a writ petion public interest litigation (PIL). if the party fails to establish his locus standi, his suit or petition, as the casemay be, is bound to fail.
The 'due process of law' as appearing in clause iv of the Petition of Right, 1354,and in Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments in the Constitution of the United States or the 'Rule of Law', propounded by Professor William E. Hearne andProfessor A. V. Dicey, envisaged that the law is now what it appears to be in the strict lexicographical sense but what it ought to be in the dispensation of justice. According to Professor Stanley de Smith, 'the law should conform to certain minimum standards of justice, both substantive and procedureal'. Mohammad Tayeebvs. Government of the People's (A. B. M. Khairul Haque CJ) (Civil) 12 ADC 1 ....View Full Judgment

Section 18

Appointment of Examination Committee and composition there of—Whether Madrasha Education Board is competent to appoint such Examination Committee and Secretary of Madrasha Examination Centre Committee—As per Rules the Secretary of the Madrasha Examination Centre Committee should be the head of the Institution concerred—Respondent No. I who was an Assistant Teacher could not become centre secretary because he lacked the capacity to be appointed as the Centre Secretary and he was not appointed as per directions of the Board— His appointment as Centre Secretary has neither been according to Rules of the Board nor under its discretion—The appointment cannot, therefore, stand. The hairmàn, Bangladesh Madra-sha Education Board, Dhaka and another Vs. Moulana Md. Abdul Hye and others, 6BLD(AD)158. ....View Full Judgment