গ্যাস বিপনন নিয়মাবলি, ২০০৪
In the instant case, Clause 5.7 of the গ্যাস বিপনন নিয়মাবলি, ২০০৪ is under challenge but the petitioners are not aggrieved by the same because গ্যাস বিপনন নিয়মাবলি, ২০০৪ has no compelling or binding effect upon the petitioners since admittedly the same is not law or has no force of law. Therefore, a nexus between the petitioners’ grievance and Clause 5.7 of the গ্যাস বিপনন নিয়মাবলি, ২০০৪ by itself cannot be established that the petitioner can seek remedy under Article 102 (2) (a) (ii) of the Constitution, and therefore it is wrong on the part of the petitioner to claim that even if clause 5.7 of গ্যাস বিপনন নিয়মাবলি, ২০০৪ has no force of law, the same can still be challenged under writ of certiorari. ...Marrine Vegetable Oil Ltd & Anr Vs. Petrobangla, 1 SCOB [2015] HCD 94

The writ petitioner did not disclose in the writ petition that it had sent the aforesaid letter dated 03.032013 to KGDCL promising to pay the outstanding bills within the given period of time and therefore the same amounts to suppression of material fact and disentitles the writ petitioners to any relief under the principle of acquiescence. ...Marrine Vegetable Oil Ltd & Anr Vs. Petrobangla, 1 SCOB [2015] HCD 94

The petitioners have not come up before this Court with clean hands, therefore, they cannot get any remedy from any court of law. ...Marrine Vegetable Oil Ltd & Anr Vs. Petrobangla, 1 SCOB [2015] HCD 94 ....View Full Judgment

গ্যাস বিপনন নিয়মাবলি, ২০০৪
In the present case, clause 17 of the contracts ... contains an arbitration clause...we are of the firm view that these writ petitions are not maintainable and the petitioners have to go for arbitration in terms of clause 17 of the contracts, if they have any grievance at all. ...Marrine Vegetable Oil Ltd & Anr Vs. Petrobangla, 1 SCOB [2015] HCD 94 ....View Full Judgment