Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD & HCD)
East Bengal (Emergency) Requisition of Property Act, 1948 (XIII of 1948) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation | Head Note | Parties Name | Reference/Citation |
Sections 3 and 5 |
Non utilization of the acquired land
|
Al-Haj Abul Basher being dead his heirs (a)Hosne-Ara Begum and others Vs Bangladesh and others, | 17 BLD (AD) 321 |
Sections 5(7) and 8B |
From the correspondences between the Government and the requiring body it
is clear that the publication of the final notice in the Gazette under
section 5(7) of the Act is in process. In the circumstances, the lawful
order the High Court Division could pass under the law was to direct the
appellants either to derequisition the case property under section 8B of
the Act or to finally acquire the same by publishing in the Gazette a
notification under section 5(7) of the Act. The High Court Division wrongly
exceeded its jurisdiction in assuming the executive functions of the
Government by officials directing release of the case property in favour of
the writ petitioner.
|
Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and others Vs Abdul Wahab Mia and others, | 21 BLD (AD) 94 |
Section 5(1)(7) |
For assessment of compensation for the acquired property the period of “24 months” shall be the period preceding the date of notice under section 5(1). But there should be some proximity between notice under Section 5(1) and the notice of final acquisition under Section 5(7) of the Act. Bangladesh Vs. Luxmi Bibi and others, 14 BLD (AD) 165. |
Bangladesh Vs. Luxmi Bibi and others, | 14 BLD (AD) 165 |
Section 7 (aaa) |
Period of Limitation
|
Md. Abdul Majid Dana Vs Bangladesh, | 19 BLD (AD) 12 |
Section 7 (aa) |
After finalization of the proceeding for acquisition and notification
thereof in the Gazette the Additional Land Acquisition Officer was required
to obtain the approval of the Government before issuing the notice of the
assessment of the compensation in Form J under clause (aa) of Section 7 of
the Act. But in the instant case the records shows that no step for
obtaining the approval of the Government was taken in the case of
appellant.
|
Md. Abdul Majid Dana Vs Bangladesh, | 19 BLD (AD) 12 |
Section 8B |
There is no principle of law under which once a property has been validly acquired for a public purpose, as admitted by Government and has vested in the requiring body then even if the said property be utilized for a different purpose, the acquisition shall not stand void. A simple reading of section 8B of the Act shows that it does not come into operation in the circumstances of the case. So the order of withdrawal from acquisition in question cannot be sustained. Brahamanbaria Pourashava Vs Secretary, Ministry of Land Reforms, Government of Bangladesh and others, 19 BLD (AD) 87. |
Brahamanbaria Pourashava Vs Secretary, Ministry of Land Reforms, Government of Bangladesh and others, | 19 BLD (AD) 87 |
Section 8B |
The Government’s choice to withdraw any property from acquisition as conferred by Section 8B of the Act must be exercised before the payment of compensation and not after it. Order of such withdrawal must be done by a notification published in the official gazette. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of L.A. & L.R. and others Vs. MIS. Commercial Trust of Bangladesh Ltd. and others, 14 BLD (AD) 72. |
Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of L.A. & L.R. and others Vs. MIS. Commercial Trust of Bangladesh Ltd. and others, | 14 BLD (AD) 72 |