Regulation No. 7 of the Enquiry Committee and Tribunal (Teachers and Officers) Regulations, 1980;
section 45(5) of the First Statute of the University of Dhaka and Article 52 of the Dhaka University Order, 1973:
In the instant case, prior to referring the allegations to the Enquiry Committee set up by the Syndicate for enquiry into the allegations brought against the petitioner, the Syndicate omitted to frame a formal charge against the petitioner with a statement of the allegations on which the charge is based and also specifying therein the penalty proposed to be imposed in terms of Regulation No. 7 of the Enquiry Committee and Tribunal (Teachers and Officers) Regulations, 1980 and hence, the entire exercise by the respondent No. 2 University of Dhaka and its officials leading up to the purported demotion of the petitioner in service by the Syndicate is void ab-initio and, as such, non est in the eye of law, rendering the said purported demotion to be without lawful authority and is of no legal effect. Moreover, under section 45(5) of the First Statute of the University of Dhaka only those orders of the Syndicate which are passed on the recommendation of the Tribunal are appealable, whereas, in the instant case, since the impugned order of demotion of the petitioner in service was passed by the Syndicate without any recommendation of the Tribunal, there is no appealable order from the Syndicate and, hence, no question of preferring any appeal under Article 52 of the Dhaka University Order, 1973 arises and, thus, there is no applicability of the decision reported in 44 DLR (AD) 305 in the facts and circumstances of the case in hand. ...Samia Rahman Vs. Bangladesh and others, (Civil), 17 SCOB [2023] HCD 182 ....View Full Judgment

Article 52 of the Dhaka University Order, 1973: The learned Advocate appearing for the respondent Dhaka University submits that the petitioner filed the instant writ petition prior to disposal of the appeal and as such, the instant writ petition is premature and the same is not maintainable. Article 52 of the Order, 1973 provides provisions for appeal to the Chancellor. Challenging the Syndicate’s decision and the office order temporarily releasing the petitioner from duties, he preferred an appeal to the Chancellor. Clause 45(5) of the First Statutes states that appeal to the Chancellor can be made against any order passed by the Syndicate on the recommendation of the Tribunal. In this case, the Syndicate’s decision was taken without any recommendation of the Tribunal. Therefore, the decision and subsequent office order in question are not appealable under Article 52 of the Order, 1973. Authority for this proposition of law is the case of Samia Rahman vs. Government of Bangladesh and others, 17 SCOB [2023] HCD 182 in which one of us was party. The appeal in question was misconceived and not being a statutory appeal, the instant writ petition is maintainable. .....Prof. Dr. Md. Rahmat Ullah Vs. Bangladesh & ors, (Spl. Original), 19 SCOB [2024] HCD 140 ....View Full Judgment

The Rajshahi University Act, 1973
Section 51 r/w
The Dhaka University Act, 1973
Section 52
Awarded the punishment of Censure– Without exhausting the appellate forum of filing appeal before the Chancellor under section 51 of the Act, 1973 wrongly filed the writ petition before the High Court Division which is not maintainable in the eye of law– A case of Dhaka University which is guided by the Dhaka University Act, 1973. The provision of section 51 of the Rajshahi University Act, 1973 is almost similar to the provisions of section 52 of the Dhaka University Act, 1973. In view of the foregoing discussions we are also of the view that the writ petitioner-respondent No.1 without exhausting the appellate forum of filing appeal before the Chancellor under section 51 of the Act, 1973 wrongly filed the writ petition before the High Court Division which is not maintainable in the eye of law, but the High Court Division without applying the judicial mind passed the impugned judgment and order dated 22.02.2021. .....Rajshahi University, Bangladesh =VS= Md. Ruhul Amin, (Civil), 2022(1) [12 LM (AD) 304] ....View Full Judgment