Sections 5(1) and 14
|
জাতীয় সংসদ সচিবালয় আইন, ১৯৯৪
Sections 5(1) and 14
The Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972
Article 79
If Appellate Division consider the provisions of sections 5(1) and 14 of
the জাতীয় সংসদ সচিবালয় আইন,
১৯৯৪ coupled with above proposition of law, then it would be
abundantly clear that the Speaker of the Parliament has been entrusted with
all the administrative power of the Parliament Secretariat but at the same
time he or she is answerable to the House for his or her conduct and
activities relating to "সংসদ সচিবালয়ের
যাবতীয় কর্মকান্ড' and, as such, the House in
taking the action on the illegal conduct/activities of the Ex-Speaker did
not violet any Rules of Procedure of the Parliament or any provision of the
Constitution. ––This Division finds merit in all the appeals.
Accordingly, all the appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment and order
passed by the High Court Division is set aside. .....Government of
Bangladesh =VS= Md. Masud Rana, (Civil), 2023(2) [15 LM (AD) 616]
....View Full Judgment
|
Government of Bangladesh =VS= Md. Masud Rana |
15 LM (AD) 616 |
Sections 9 and 18
|
The Parliament Secretariat Act, 1994
Sections 9 and 18 r/w
Special Medical Attendant Rules, 1950
Rule 12
The Parliament Secretariat Act, 1994 the Parliament is the proper authority
to take decision, action or raise question on the approval of alleged bills
and neither the ACC nor any authority does have power to raise question
about the approval of said bills–– From the combined reading of Section
9 together with Section 18 of the Parliament Secretariat Act, 1994 it
appears indubitably that the parliament secretariat will be responsible
only to the Parliament through the Controller and Auditor General over the
matter of expenditure of the financial allocation in the yearly budget and
nobody else can raise any question as to the use of such budget. But in the
cases in hand, those provisions of the Parliament Secretariat Act, 1994
will not give any protection to the appellant since the Anti-Corruption
Commission brought allegation against the appellant and other accused
persons as to the mode of approval of medical bills in doing which the
Speaker was not authorized to approve without the sanction of the Prime
Minister. However, Appellate Division has already viewed that neither the
ACC nor any authority does have power to raise question about the authority
of the Speaker in approving said bills. .....Barrister Muhammad Jamiruddin
Sircar =VS= The State, (Criminal), 2022(2) [13 LM (AD) 572]
....View Full Judgment
|
Barrister Muhammad Jamiruddin Sircar =VS= The State |
13 LM (AD) 572 |