"Traveling allowance"-It varies upon the circumstances of each journey undertaken by an employee.
Government of People's Republic of Bangladesh represented by the Secretary Ministry of Labour and Manpower, Bangladesh Secretariat Dhaka vs Hasan Movies Ltd and others 48 DLR (AD) 40.

Service record counted when the date of birth entered in the service or SSC–
Rule 9 of Bangladesh Service Rules (Part-I), where it has been stated as under:
"বিধি-৯। সরকারী চাকরিতে প্রবেশের সময় বা প্রবেশের উদ্দেশে একজন আবেদনকারী যে বয়স ঘোষনা করেন, উহাই তাহার ক্ষেত্রে আবশিকভাবে প্রযোজ্য হইবে এবং পরবরতীকালে কোন উদ্দেশেই তাহা সংশোধনের অনুমতি দেওয়া যাইবে না।"
The case of Randir Singh Vs. The Sate of Rajastan and others reported in 1992(2) ESC 435 (Raj) where it has been observed that the respondents were duty bound to scrutinize the documents right at the time of admission rather than punishing at a belated stage.
(1995) 4 SCC 172 the Indian Supreme Court held that when the date of birth entered in the service and leave record on the basis of voluntary declaration made by the employee at the time of appointment authenticated by him and never objected to up to the fag end of service such action of any party will act as acquiescence and when a party expresses acquiescence and thereby waived a right to dispute he will be estopped from making any such dispute at the end of the service.
Reported in 15 MLR (AD) 65, this Division held that when by an act, conduct or consent, express or implied a person allows another person to proceed in doing some act or transaction with bona fide belief, such conduct or consent of the person so allowing constitutes waiver and acquiescence and the said person is stopped from claiming any right subsequent thereto against the person acting under such assurance.
We are of the view that since the order impugned before the High Court Division had been issued after retirement of the writ-petitioner-respondent he cannot be treated in the service of the Republic. Thus issuance of the order impugned before the High Court Division upon the writ-petitioner-respondent, when he was not actually in the service can be challenged under Article 102 of the Constitution. We do not find any substance in this appeal. Accordingly, this civil appeal is dismissed without any order as to costs. …Ministry of Social Welfare, Bangladesh =VS= Akterun Nabi(Md.), (Civil), 2019 (2) [7 LM (AD) 63] ....View Full Judgment

Under rule 9 of the BSR Part I date of birth declared and recorded at the time of entry into service cannot be changed subsequently.
Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation Vs. Abdul Barek Dewan being dead his heirs Bali Begum and others 4, MLR (1999) (AD) 167.

lf Class III and Class IV employees have been exempted from operation of rule 24(1) then it is an improvement in their general condition of service. If any authority violates this improved condition of service then it is a clear violation of the general conditions of service of that employee.
Government of Bangladesh and Ors vs Mohammad Faruque 51 DLR (AD) 112.

Under Rule 24(1) of Bangladesh Service Rules Government Servant may be transferred from one post to another. This is a term and conditions of service of a Government servant If Class III and Class IV employees have been exempted from operation of Rule 24(1) then it is an improvement in their general condition of service. If any authority violates the said improved condition of service and transfers a Class III or Class IV employee from one station to another then it is a clean violation of the general conditions of service of that employee.
Government of Bangladesh and ors., Vs Mohammad Faruque, 18 BLD (AD) 277.

The plea of waiver or acquiescence is not available in respect of violation of any law. If it is violated, the Court is bound to say so, no matter when it is raised– The Administrative Appellate Tribunal miserably failed to notice that in the instant case there found no application of the said “special circumstances of the case” by the Government. Rather the then Director General applied the said “special circumstances of the case’ concerning the unauthorized leave of absence of the respondent for 07 years and 07 months and 24 days from his work. As the Director General was not empowered to act under rule 34, his alleged application of the said “special circumstances of the case’ was not only without lawful authority but also void ab intio. What is void ab initio, that cannot be validated later in any way. Appellate Division opines that the Administrative Appellate Tribunal erred in law in interfering with the judgment and order of the Administrative Tribunal. The Government is at liberty in taking initiative for refunding the amount paid to the respondent-petitioner as pay and allowances. .....Ministry of Planning, Bangladesh =VS= Sayed Mahabubul Karim, (Civil), 2022(2) [13 LM (AD) 157] ....View Full Judgment

Bangladesh Service Rules(1st Part)
Rule 34
It is unambiguous from the phraseology of the rule 34 of the BSR that when continuous absence from work exceeds five years, be the absence with or without leave; the service of a Government servant will come to an end. Yet, the Government and only the Government may make a diverse conclusion upon taking into consideration any special state of affairs. Consequently, this mechanical ceasing of the service is subject to the ability of the Government to take a different decision in the light of out of the ordinary situation. …Bangladesh and another Vs. Sayed Mahabubul Karim, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] AD 46 ....View Full Judgment

A Government servant ceases to be in service in consequence of his continuous absence from duties for more than five years without leave—
In the instant case the respondent filed the application u/s 4(1) before taking any decision by the departmental higher authority and as such the application is held not maintainable. Moreover the respondent tendered his resignation and remained absent from duty for more than 25 years without leave and in consequence whereof he ceased to be in the government employment as provided under rule 34 of the BSR Part-I. The apex court held the impugned judgment of the Administrative Tribunal and Administrative Appellate Tribunal illegal and set-aside the same. Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Food and others Vs. A.B.M Siddique Mia 15 MLR (2010) (AD) 460.

Writ-petitioner allowed to join her post–
We are of the opinion that the decision of the concerned authority to treat the service of the writ-petitioner as ceased, without considering any special circumstances put forward by her, is in violation of rule 34 of the BSR. Hence, the writ-petitioner-respondent No.1 must be allowed to join her post. The writ-respondents are directed to accept the joining letter of the writ-petitioner. However, in view of her absence from service, we are of the opinion that the writ-petitioner will not be entitled to receive any arrear salary. ...Government of Bangladesh =VS= Dr. Monija Begum, (Civil), 2019 (1) [6 LM (AD) 35] ....View Full Judgment

Bangladesh Service Rules, Part-1
Rule 42
Bengal Statue 1781, Bengal Regulation No.1793, Act of 1964, Act of 1865, Act of 1871, Act of 1877 and Act 16 of 1908, Act of 1964
Service (Reorganization and Condition) Act, 1975
Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972
Article 102, 105
Supreme Court of Bangladesh (Appellate Division) Rules, 1988
Order XXVI
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Order XLVII, rule 1
Extra Mohorars— Writ-petitioners are entitled to united grades and pay of scale, equal pay and other benefits of service— The respondents-writ-petitioners invoked writ jurisdiction under Article 102 of the Constitution to protect their rights as Government employees and against hostile and discriminatory action of the appellant-writ respondents as such writ petition is very much maintainable. .....Ministry of Law, Bangladesh =VS= Abdur Rahman Bhuiyan, (Civil), 2024(1) [16 LM (AD) 35] ....View Full Judgment

Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1985
Rule 4(b), 4(2)(b)
The Bangladesh Service Rules (Part-II)
Rule 45
The Jail Code
Rule 194
Increments can be withheld for a specified period– In ordering the withholding of an increment the withholding authority shall state the period for which it is withheld, and whether the postponement shall have the effect of postponing future increments. The same principle has been followed in Rule 4(b) of the Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1985. It is quite evident from the Fundamental Rule 24 that increments can be withheld for a specified period and it is to be stated whether the postponement shall have the effect of postponing future increments. But in the instant case the two annual increments of the petitioner had been stopped permanently and it was not stated whether the said postponement of the annual increment shall affect the future increments, which is derogatory to the Fundamental Rule 24. It is, therefore, clear that the appellants passed the impugned orders by violating the Rule 24 of the Fundamental Rules; the Rule 45 of the B.S.R. (Part-II); the Rule 4(2)(b) of the Government servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1985 and the Rule 194 of the Jail Code. .....Government of Bangladesh =VS= Mohd. Bazlur Rashid Akand, (Civil), 2022(1) [12 LM (AD) 19] ....View Full Judgment

Rule-52 read with Fundamental Rule-29
The punishment inflicted upon the appellant by the domestic tribunal is defective for not fixing any time limit for the reduction in rank. For this defect the penalty itself cannot be set aside, but only modified. This will not only be in conformity with Rule 52 of the Bangladesh Service Rules hut also with Fundamental Rule 29, although Fundamental Rule 29 has been framed in a different context. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we think that the ends of justice will be met if we only state the period of reduction in rank of the appellant.
S. N. Chowdhury Vs. Govt. of Bangladesh & Ors. 9BLT (AD)-145.

Also provides for the penalty of reduction to be for specified period—
As provided under rule 52 of the Bangladesh Service Rules Part I read with rule 4 (3)(a) of the Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1985 the authority while imposing the penalty of reduction in rank must specify the period during which such penalty shall exist. When the period is not specified in the order the penalty itself where the charges are established, can not be set aside but be modified. Anwar Hossain (Md.) Vs. Government of Bangladesh represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Finance and others 12 MLR (2007) (AD) 12.

The period of absence of Government servant on reinstatement in service after wrongful retirement shall be treated as a period spent on duty and he will be entitled to pay allowances and as admissible under clause (a) of the Rule. Clause (a) of Rule 72 speaks that in case of honourable acquittal the incumbent is entitled to full pay to which he would have been entitled if he had not been dismissed or removed or suspended. The Administrate Appellate Tribunal rightly held that the respondent is entitled to the arrear pay and allowances.
Secretary, Ministry of Establishment Vs A .M Nurunnabi 21 BLD (AD) 41.

Bangladesh Service Rules, Part-1
Rule 246, 147 and 249 r/w
The Public Servants (Retirement) Act, 1974
Section 10
The authority stopping the pay of the pension to the petitioner has no legal basis– In the instant case the petitioner neither convicted nor found guilty of grave misconduct by any competent authority during his entire 31 years service period. In the instant case there was no judicial or departmental proceedings pending against the petitioner at the time of his retirement; even no proceedings either judicial or department had been initiated against him within a year of his retirement. Thus, the action taken by the authority stopping the pay of the pension to the petitioner has no legal basis. The respondents have failed to show us that the impugned action has been taken within the ambit of the above provisions of law or any other relevant law. .....Sanaullah(Md.) =VS= Government of Bangladesh, (Civil), 2022(1) [12 LM (AD) 319] ....View Full Judgment

Once the project comes to an end the services of the employees in the project also come to an end. The appellant having been appointed on work-charge basis in a project and the post not having made a regular one so as to entitle him to receive pension benefit could not claim relying on the equality basis being a persons similarly situated under certain mistake decision arrived at or misconstruction of certain circular having no force of law.
Abdur Rahman (Md) vs Government of Bangladesh represented by the Secretary, Ministry of LGRD and Co­-operatives and another 10 BLC (AD) 179.

Bangladesh Service Rules, Part I
Rule 300 read with
Article 27 and 31 of the Constitution:
By virtue of Rule 300(b), a privilege is being granted to those who take up another pensionable job subsequent to their resignation from service. Hence, the issue of discrimination is manifest in Rule 300(b). However, persons not taking up any pensionable job post resignation lose their pension forthwith by operation of Rule 300(a). In our view, this is discrimination and is, therefore, hit by Article 27 of the Constitution. Additionally, the immediate and automatic forfeiture of pension without issuing any notice or observing any legal procedure is also hit by Article 31 of the Constitution. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7
Although classification per se is permitted both by law and under the Constitution, it has to be reasonable. However, what is ‘reasonable’ has to be determined in the context of the society and should not be based on some hypothetical analysis, totally unconnected with the realities of life. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7
The primary purpose of pension:
A pension is a quantified sum of money that is paid by the employer to the employee, upon the retirement of the employee, in consideration of the service rendered so as to enable the employee to defray the living expenses and to meet the basic necessities of life. The primary purpose of pension is to ensure that an employee, who has given the best part of his/her life in the service of the employer, has some means to fall back on during old age, when he/she is no longer able to work. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7
Employment, in our view, is a two way traffic. While the employer cannot be forced to retain an employee who is either inefficient, incompetent or even unruly and can therefore be terminated with proper notice or even be dismissed (in appropriate cases), at the same time, an employee has a similar right to tender his resignation from service. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7
Unless expressly excluded, the principle of natural justice shall apply in all cases:
We are mindful of the argument advanced by the learned DAG to the effect that as the forfeiture of the petitioner’s pension was on account of Rule 300(a) of BSR, the petitioner is now estopped from challenging the same. However, in contracts relating to service, there is a clause whereby employers can terminate the service of an employee upon giving due notice, although the employee is deemed to have been aware that his service could be terminated by the employer upon giving due notice. Can it be said that the employee is therefore estopped from challenging the termination order in a Court of law? There are a plethora of decisions to the effect that despite such a provision in a contract of employment, the concerned employee is entitled to be given a show cause notice before issuance of the termination order. This, no doubt, is in consonance with the well-settled principle of natural justice. By the same corollary, it can be said that although he concerned official is bound by the Service Rules, that cannot, ipso facto, negate the application of the principle of natural justice. It is now universally accepted and well-settled that unless expressly excluded, the principle of natural justice shall apply in all cases. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7
In the case in hand, the forfeiture of the petitioner’s pension together with past service has very serious legal and practical ramification. It is an admitted position that the petitioner had served for long nineteen year in the Judicial service holding various positions and in doing so, he had invariably, at some point in time, exercised Sessions power. If, and as Rule 300(a) provides, his past service is forfeited, what would be its practical implication? Let me elaborate. The petitioner, while exercising Sessions power in a case under section 302 of the Penal Code, might have had, in all likelihood, imposed either capital punishment or a sentence of imprisonment for life. In either event, as a mandatory requirement, the appeal by the appellant would have travelled upto the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, where it had either been allowed or dismissed by the Apex Court. In the event of an appeal involving capital punishment or imprisonment for life being dismissed, the judgment passed by the petitioner would stand affirmed. However, as in the present case, if the petitioners’ past service stands forfeited on account of his resignation from service, what would be the fate of such an appeal decided by the Apex Court? Would it stand annulled as well? If so, Rule 300 (a) of BSR would have the effect of nullifying a judgment upheld by the highest Court of the country. This would give rise to an absurd scenario. Can such a position be even conceived, far less accepted? The answer is an empathic no. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7
It is now well settled that a ‘discriminatory act’ is also “arbitrary”. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7
We reiterate that despite our extensive research, we could not come across a single law or rule, either in our jurisdiction or for that matter in any other jurisdiction, where resignation has been classified or defined as an offence or misconduct. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7
Doctrine of severability:
It is now well settled through judicial pronouncements that when any particular law or Rule is challenged as being ultravires the Constitution, if the offending part can be segregated from the rest of the section or rule, then the proper course of action is to strike down the offending part without striking down the entire section or rule. This is commonly referred to as the “doctrine of severability”. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7
A person who tenders resignation from service, should also be entitled to receive pension, depending on the length of his/her service:
Although the maximum tenure of service required for being entitled to full pension is 25 years or more, depending on the person’s age at the time of entry into Government service, nevertheless, a sliding scale is provided for the person who retires before completing 25 years of service. By the same corollary, a person who resigns from service before reaching the age of superannuation should also be entitled to receive pension depending on the number of years of service rendered by such person. Although ‘retirement’ and ‘resignation’ are two distinct nomenclatures, in reality, they achieve the same purpose by bringing to an end the long standing, formal relationship between an employer and an employee ; in the former case, through operation of law and in the latter case, upon one’s own volition. On a similar note, a person who tenders resignation from service, should also be entitled to receive pension, depending on the length of his/her service. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7 ....View Full Judgment

Bangladesh Service Rules, Part I:
Rule 300(a)
Rule 300(a) of the Bangladesh Service Rules, Part I, so far as it only relates to “forfeiture of pension in the event of resignation from service” is declared to be ultravires the Constitution. However, the remaining part of Rule 300 (a) and Rule 300 (b) remains unaffected and valid. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7 ....View Full Judgment

Bangladesh Service Rules, Part I:
Rule 300
It is important to note that prior to dismissal from service, as a mandatory requirement of law, a person has to be given a show-cause notice, usually followed by a departmental enquiry. This is commonly known as ‘the due process’, whereby the person concerned is afforded an opportunity to explain his/her position. However, in the case of resignation from service, there is no such requirement. Merely upon tendering resignation from service, a person loses his right to pension forthwith. There is no provision for holding an enquiry, let alone issuance of any show cause notice to the person concerned, which is tantamount to non-compliance with the right to be treated in accordance with law. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7
Generally understood, resignation means cessation or discontinuation of a person’s service with the employer. The act of resignation is a unilateral act on the part of the employee, tendered in writing to the employer. It formally brings to an end the relationship between an employer and an employee. That being the universally accepted position, can resignation from service be deemed to be an offence or misdemeanor? Does any law or rule forbid an employee from resigning? Has any punishment been prescribed, either in our legal system, or for that matter, in any other legal system, for an employee who has resigned from service? In such context, how can a person who has tendered his resignation from service (for whatever reason) be visited with such a drastic form of punishment which deprives him of his hard earned pension to which he has become entitled by rendering service to the employer for a considerable period of time? Can such a rule be said to be in consonance with our Constitution? Obviously, the answer has to be in the negative. To hold otherwise would be contrary to the intent and spirit of our Constitution. …Md Mahboob Murshed Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Civil), 16 SCOB [2022] HCD 7 ....View Full Judgment