Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD & HCD)
Madrasha Education Ordinance, 1978 (IX of 1978) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation | Head Note | Parties Name | Reference/Citation |
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 |
Ministry of Education =VS= Mowlana Wahiduzzaman | 8 LM (AD) 153 |
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).
|
Mohammad Tayeeb vs. Government of the People's | 12 ADC 1 |
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 chairman, Bangladesh Madrasha Education Board, Dhaka and another Vs. Moulana Md. Abdul Hye and others, 6 BLD (AD) 158. |
The chairman, Bangladesh Madrasha Education Board, Dhaka and another Vs. Moulana Md. Abdul Hye and others | 6 BLD (AD) 158 |