Section 2, 6(Uma)
|
Challenging the inaction of the writ respondents in disposal of the
application–– The local people are now using the pond as a Garbage Bin
by throwing wastes and hazards in the pond and using the pond for
discharging sewerage therein which are damaging heritage of the historical
Monthon Pond and on the other hand, the Fire Service and Civil Defence has
taken initiatives to renovate the pond by making walkways around the pond,
for using the same for swimmers training purposes with a view to explore
training, experiences and skills of the firemen. ––The leave petitioner
is allowed to use the pond for ‘জরুরী and সুইমিং
ট্রেনিং‘ purpose only and for that purpose be entitled to
set up Swimming Pool, Water Rescue and Divers Training for the purpose of
using the same by the Bangladesh Fire Service and Civil Defense directly.
The District Administration Office is directed to supervise such
construction/there any construction and conversion accordingly.
.....Bangladesh Fire Service & Civil Defence =VS= Committee for Protection
of Monthon Pond, (Civil), 2023(1) [14 LM (AD) 637]
....View Full Judgment
|
Bangladesh Fire Service & Civil Defence =VS= Committee for Protection of Monthon Pond |
14 LM (AD) 637 |
Section 2(ka ka), 2(Ka), 6 (Uma) and 15
|
Joladhar Ain 2000(Act XXXVI of 2000)
Sections 2(Cha), 3, 5 and 8:
And
Environment Conservation Act, 1995
Section 2(ka ka), 2(Ka), 6 (Uma) and 15:
We perused the Dhaka Metropolitan Development Plan, VOL-II Urban Area Plan
(1995-2015) published in the Gazette notification vide SRO No. 91-AIN/1997
on 05.04.1997, commonly known as “Proposed Master Plan”, wherein the
“Begumbari Khal” has been recorded and recognized as a “Joladhar”.
Side by side the registered deed in favour of EPB executed by the
Bangladesh Railway Annexure K-2, in its schedule clearly mentioned the
transferred property as “Doba”-(waterbody) which attracts Section
2(Cha) of the “Joladhar Ain 2000” as well as section 2(ka ka) of the
Environment Conservation Act. As such pursuant to the non-obstante clause
incorporated in section 3 of the “Joladhar Ain 2000” as well as section
2Ka of the Environment Conservation Act 1995, both the laws shall prevail
over any other law prevailing in the country for the time being in force.
Thus the prohibition imposed by section 5 of the Joladhar Ain and section 6
(Uma) of the Environment Conservation Act shall automatically come into
operation and any violation of the said prohibition shall be dealt with in
accordance with section 8 of the “Joladhar Ain,” as well as section 15
of the Environment Conservation Act 1995. In such view of the matter the
transfer/allotment of the water body by EPB to BGMEA and consequently the
change of the nature and character of the said water body (“Joladhar”)
by BGMEA is completely violative of the said two laws and as such the
violators are liable to be punished with imprisonment and fine and such
illegal construction is liable to be demolished for which BGMEA or any
other person is not liable to get any compensation. …BGMEA Vs. Bangladesh
& ors, (Civil), 9 SCOB [2017] AD 70
....View Full Judgment
|
BGMEA Vs. Bangladesh & ors |
9 SCOB [2017] AD 70 |
Section 4
|
Writ petition in public interest, impugning the continued failure by the
government and other public authorities,in particular the respondent No.
1 to comply with their legal duties under the existing laws including the
Environment Conservation Act 1995 and the Environment Conservation Rules
1997 in taking action, inter alia, to seal tube-wells contamined with
arsenic and to test water quality and to ensure that the contents of
arsenic in the groundwater did not exceed a particular quantity as noted in
the Environment Conservation Rules 1997.......... (2) Rabia Bhuiyan, M.P
vs. Ministry of Local Government (Md. Tafazzul Islam (Civil) 5ADC 1
|
Rabia Bhuiyan, M.P vs. Ministry of Local Government |
5 ADC 1 |
Section 5
|
Lease of Lands in Hotel/Motel Zone of Cox’s Bazar–
The policy of preservation of the ecological balance and protection of the
natural resources of our country not only for our future generations, but
also to ensure protection of the environment from degradation and the
harmful effects of climate change.
All leases within Jhilanja Mouza granted after 19.04.1999 be cancelled in
the same way as those of the writ-petitioners and any constructions made
thereon be demolished. Of course, the lease holders shall be compensated
for their loss due to such cancellation/demolition. We further direct that
henceforth no lease shall be granted within Jhilanja Mouza or any area
which has been classified as ecologically critical area.
We finally re-iterate that the petitioners shall be fully compensated for
their loss due to the cancellation of their leases, in accordance with the
decision of the High Court Division. …Mahbubul Anam =VS= Ministry of
Land, Bangladesh, (Civil), 2019 (2) [7 LM (AD) 367]
....View Full Judgment
|
Mahbubul Anam =VS= Ministry of Land, Bangladesh |
7 LM (AD) 367 |
Section 5
|
Bangladesh Environment Conservation Act
Section 5 read with
Environment Conservation Rules (1997) read with
The Constitution of Bangladesh
Article 32
Right to life as guaranteed by the Constitution includes the right to
protection and improvement of the environment and ecology– The Supreme
Court of Bangladesh, on umpteen occasions, has given directives and
guidelines to the government to demarcate the rivers as per their original
borderlines and to restore free flow of water restraining the illegal
attempts of their encroachments and to save them from being perished. Many
housing companies and land developers found engaged in changing the nature
and features of wetlands and rivers have already been stopped because of
the proactive role of the Judiciary of Bangladesh. But, nevertheless, we
have a long way to go and take a firm stand to build up public awareness
and legislate more stringent laws to cope with the needs of the changing
society, otherwise it will be difficult for us to protect the bountiful
treasures of nature and ensure environmental security without which the
lives of our posterity will be at stake. …Ministry of Land, BD =VS=
Mohammad Mushfaqur Rahman, (Civil), 2020 (1) [8 LM (AD) 325]
....View Full Judgment
|
Ministry of Land, Bangladesh =VS= Mohammad Mushfaqur Rahman |
8 LM (AD) 325 |
Section 5
|
Cancellation of long term lease granted by the government for the purpose
of constructing hotels in the ho-tel/motel zone of Cox’s Bazar:
Dismissing the review petitions, the Court directed that all leases within
Jhilanja Mouza of Cox’s Bazar granted after 19.04.1999 be cancelled in
the same way as those of the writ-petitioners and any constructions made
thereon be demolished; the leaseholders shall be compensated for their loss
due to such cancellation/ demolition.
It was further directed that henceforth no lease shall be granted within
Jhilanja Mouza or any area which has been classified as ecologically
critical area. Mahbubul Anam -Vs.- Ministry of Land, represented by its
Secretary Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others
(Civil) 2019 ALR (AD) Online 321
....View Full Judgment
|
Mahbubul Anam -Vs.- Ministry of Land, represented by its Secretary Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others |
2019 ALR (AD) Online 321 |
Sections “6 Uma” and 12
|
The “Joladhar” Ain, 2000”
Section 5 r/w
The Environment Conservation Act 1995
Sections “6 Uma” and 12 r/w
The Building Construction Rules, 1996
Rule 3(I)
We have no hesitation to hold that the BGMEA building complex has been
constructed by the petitioner illegally in violation of all the laws of the
land which cannot stay upright rather the same deserves to be demolished at
once– The petitioner is directed to demolish the building namely,
“BGMEA Complex” situated on the water body 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. .....Bangladesh Garments Manufacturers and Exporters Association
(BGMEA) =VS= Government of Bangladesh & others, [1 LM (AD) 142]
....View Full Judgment
|
Bangladesh Garments Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA) =VS= Government of Bangladesh & others |
1 LM (AD) 142 |
Section 6 (Uma)
|
Bangladesh Environment Conservation Act, 1995
Section 6 (Uma)
Constitution of Bangladesh
Article 104
Protection of environment– The subject matter of the instant case not
only represents an occasion to, but also demands, exercise of this power by
this Division for the avowed purpose of protection of environment.
Madhumati Model Town project in Bilamalia and Bailarpur Mouzas is declared
unlawful and Metro Makers are directed to restore the wetlands of these two
mouzas to its original state within six months from the date of
availability of the certified copy of the judgment, failing which, RAJUK is
directed to undertake the work of restoration of these wetlands and recover
the cost of restoration from Metro Makers and their directors treating the
cost as a public demand. Though the third party purchasers may not be
treated as bona fide, yet it is a fact that they have been roped in by
Metro Makers by misrepresentation that permission for the development work
had been obtained from RAJUK and justice demands that they should be
compensated. (Per Syed Mahmud Hossain, J). ...Metro Makers and Developers
Limited =VS= BELA, (Civil), 2021(2) [11 LM (AD) 261]
....View Full Judgment
|
Metro Makers and Developers Limited =VS= BELA |
11 LM (AD) 261 |
Section 7
|
Provides for conservation of environment and ecological balance for healthy
and better living of the people—
Act No. XXXVI of 2000 provides for punishable offence for violation of the
environmental law—
The High Court Division directed the writ respondents to take appropriate
measures to remove the encroachments in the river Buriganga, Shitalakha,
Turag after ascertaining the boundaries by survey. The authorities
concerned issued notices upon the appellants to remove the illegal
structures. The apex court found the directions of the High Court Division
perfectly justified and accordingly the leave petitions are dismissed. City
Sugar Industries Ltd. and others Vs. Human Rights and Peace for Bangladesh
and others 15 MLR (2010) (AD) 389.
|
City Sugar Industries Ltd. and others Vs. Human Rights and Peace for Bangladesh and others |
15 MLR (AD) 389 |
Section 12
|
read with
Environment Conservation Act 1995
Rule 7(4) —No construction of any project can be undertaken without
obtaining the Environment Clearance Certificate
“(পরিবেশগত ছাড়পত্র)” from the Director
General of Environment not ‘site clearance
certificate’(অবস্থানগত ছাড়পত্র).
The Appellate Division held that the petitioner’s building admittedly
being a fifteen storied commercial building requires both
“অবস্থানগত ছাড়পত্র” as well as
“পরিবেশগত ছাড়পত্র” which the petitioner
failed /did not care to obtain as per requirement of law. In the absence of
any environment clearance certificate (পরিবেশগত
ছাড়পত্র) obtained from or issued by the Director General of
the Department of Environment, no commercial establishment/project can be
set up or built as provided in Section 12 read with Rule 7(4).
President, Bangladesh Garments Manufacturers and Exporters Association
(BGMEA) 23/1 Panthapath Link Road Kawran Bazar Dhaka. -Vs.- Government of
Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Public
Works, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka and others. (Civil) 8 ALR (AD) 304-315
|
BGMEA -Vs.- Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Public Works and others |
8 ALR (AD) 304 |
Section 20 & 4
|
Legal action against the private plaintiffs want to convert the suit land
into industrial plot by felling trees–
There is no denying fact that almost entire plot or a portion thereof is
covered by various plantations. As per provisions of section 20 of the
‘পরিবেশ সংরক্ষণ আইন, 1995, the Director
General has power under section 4 of the Ain to close down any industrial
organisation if he is satisfied that such closure is necessary for
conservation, preservation protection of environment. By felling the
standing trees if a textile mill is set up in the suit land, the
environment of the locality will be affected. The Forest Officer may take
legal action against the plaintiffs through the Director General for the
conservation of the environment if the private plaintiffs want to convert
the suit land into industrial plot by felling trees. .....Government of
Bangladesh =VS= Md. Shawkat Hossain, (Civil), 2018 (1) [4 LM (AD) 209]
....View Full Judgment
|
Government of Bangladesh =VS= Md. Shawkat Hossain |
4 LM (AD) 209 |
Project: Ashiyan City Prokalpo–
|
Bangladesh Land Holding (Limitation) Order, 1972 (P.O.98 of 1972)
Sections 3, 4(d)
Private Residential Project Land Development Rules, 2004
Rule 8(1)
State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950
Section 20 r/w 90(3)
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 114 & Order XLVII rule 1 r/w
Town Improvement Act, 1953;
Environment Conservation Act, 1995;
Environment Conservation Rules 1997;
মহানগরী, বিভাগীয় শহর ও জেলা
শহরের পৌর এলাকাসহ দেশের সকল
পৌর এলাকার খেলার মাঠ,
উন্মুক্ত স্থান, উদ্যান এবং
প্রাকৃতিক জলাধার সংরক্ষণের
জন্য প্রণীত আইন, ২০০০
Project: Ashiyan City Prokalpo–– It transpires that from the record
that the Deputy Commission earlier gave ‘No-objection’ in respect of
55.6 acres of land in favour of the review petitioner-respondent No.1 for
its project but it was entitled to retain only 33 acres of land as per
Bangladesh Land Holding (Limitation) Order 1972 (P.O. 98 of 1972) and
বেসরকারি আবাসিক ভূমি উন্নয়ন
বিধিমালা, ২০০৪ at the relevant time. It is
evidenced from the record that respondent No.1 got approval of other
authorities, including utilities such as Dhaka Electric Supply Company,
Dhaka Water Supply and Sewerage Authority, Bangladesh Telegraph and
Telephone Board and Titas Gas as well as the Fire Service and Civil
Defence, Dhaka Transport Coordination Board, Dhaka Metropolitan Police and
Water Development Board. ––Appellate Division is of the view that
review petitioner-respondent No.1 is entitled to proceed his project in
respect of 33 acres of land pursuant to the permission dated 25.09.2012 and
annexures ‘C’, ‘K’ and ‘M’ will be applicable only in respect
of the said quantum of land and permission of respective organizations.
.....Bangladesh =VS= Ashiyan City Development Ltd. , (Civil), 2024(1) [16
LM (AD) 486]
....View Full Judgment
|
Bangladesh =VS= Ashiyan City Development Ltd. |
16 LM (AD) 486 |