High Court Division :
(Civil Revisional Jurisdiction)
Sharif Uddin
Chaklader J
AKM Shahidul Huq J
Towhidur Rahman Md) Mandol Plain tiff-Respondent-Petitioner
vs
Principal, Rangpur Model College and others ………….Proforma-Defendant-Respondent Opposite-Parties”
Judgment July 30th, 2013.
Natural Justice
The expression “natural justice” may not be capable of precise definition. But the basic and fundamental requirements of “natural justice” are well known and have been repeatedly affirmed by courts of highest authority. Particular forms of legal procedure may not be necessary, but it is of the very essence of an enquiry and a decision that the person enquiring must be one without bias and should render the decision in a judicial spirit and in accordance with the principles of substantial justice. .. …. (14)
Jumuna Oil Company Ltd. vs SK Dey, 44 (AD) DLR 104; Bangladesh vs Commercial Trust of Bangladesh Ltd. 46 DLR (AD) 89; Mahinuddin vs Dhaka University 45 DLR 292; Professor Colam Azam vs Bangladesh, 45 DLR 423; Ehsanul Hoque vs General Manager, Agrani Bank, 42 DLR 60; Bangladesh vs Professor Colam Azam, 46 DLR (AD) 192; Bangladesh Steamer Agents Association vs Bangladesh, 33 DLR (AD) 177; Abul Hossain Akand (Md) vs Abul Kalam Azad, 49 DLR 257; Rafiqul Alam vs Secretary Ministry of Works, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, 49 DLR 456; Principal, Chittagong Medical College vs Shahrayar Murshed, 48 DLR (AD) 33; Shahrayar Murshed vs Chittagong Medical College, 48 DLR 482; Chairman, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Jessore vs Md AmiI’ Hossain, 56 DLR (AD) 24 and Md Idrisur Rahman vs Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs 29 BLD 32. = 61 DLR 523 ref.
AJ Mohammad Ali, and MG Mahmud Shahin, Advocates-For the Plaintiff-Respondent-Petitioner.
Habibul Islam Bhuiyan, Advocate-For the Proforma- Defendan t- Responden t-Opposite- Parties.
Judgment
Sharif Uddin Chaklader J: This Rule, at the instance of plaintiff, directed against judgment and decree dated 19-6-2011 passed by the learned Special District Judge, 1 sl Court, Rangpur allowing Title Appeal No. 177 of 2007 thereby dismissing Title Suit No. 27 of 2006 on reversing those dated 24-10-2007 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, 2nd Court, Rangpur, in charge of the Court of Senior Assistant Judge, Sadar, Rangpur.
2. Plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit praying for decree for declaration that as per decision of governing body of Rangpur Model College, plaintiff having been appointed as vice principal of the aforesaid college is in service as Vice Principal.
3. It is the case of plaintiff, in brief, that, Rangpur Model College was established in 1995 and later on, was affiliated as a Degree College in 1998, of which plaintiff was appointed as the Lecturer of Physics at the time of establishment of the college. The governing body of the college on 8-12-2001 took a resolution to appoint plaintiff as vice-principal of the col1ege, and consequently the appointment letter was issued on 27-12-2001 and plaintiff joined the post of vice-principal on 29-12-2001.
The governing body of the college by resolution dated 17-2-2002 decided to include plaintiff in the scheme of Monthly Pay Order, 1996. The governing body vide its resolution dated 27-72002 decided to send relevant papers to the concerned authority to pay salary to the plaintiff as vice-principal. In the meantime plaintiff carried out various duties of the college and put his signature as the vice-principal of the college from 29-12-2001 to 30-12-2004. The plaintiff on many occasions represented the college as the vice principal of the college. Plaintiff observed that his designation on the attendance registrar was penned through and was written as Assistant Professor from 1-10-2004 to 30-12-2004 against which, he raised objection on 4-1-2005. Defendant No.1 did not give any reply to the objection of the plaintiff. Plaintiff on 29-11-2005 filed application to the Chairman of the governing body for redress his grievances but in vain. Plaintiff on 20-12-2005 filed applications for casual leave and also on 21-12-2005 and 2212-2005 but defendant No.1 warned the plaintiff not to use the designation of vice-principal, against which plaintiff through his learned Advocate sent a legal notice upon the defendants on 26-12-2005 but of no effect, hence the suit.
4. The case of defendant No.1 is that, the governing body of the college appointed plaintiff as vice-principal purely on temporary basis, subject to the subsequent appointment as per rules of the National University; the notice for appointment was published in the daily ‘Juger Alo’ on 25-6-2002; 8 candidates including plaintiff filed application for the post of vice-principal; step was taken to have the representative present from National University as per rule; the college inspector vide memo dated 27-72003 refused the appointment raising the irregularities of the previous appointment of the plaintiff as Vice Principal; the governing body vide resolution dated 11-9-2004 was compelled to cancel the previous appointment of the plain- tiff as vice-principal; the matter was communicated to the plaintiff on 10-11-2004, plaintiff took it normally and used his designation as Assistant Professor on many occasions; plaintiff filed Writ Petition No. 8480 of 2005 as Assistant Professor to get his arrear salary; obtained his salary for the post of Assistant Professor; plaintiff himself prepared the bill in February, 2006 and received the same by using his designation as Assistant Professor.
5. In the suit, plaintiff examined 3 witnesses including himself, on the other hand. defendants examined 1 witness.
6. Learned Joint District Judge, 2nd Court, Rangpur, in charge of Senior Assistant Judge, Sadar, Rangpur by judgment and decree dated 24-10-2007 decreed the suit. Defendant No. 1 moved before the learned District Judge, Rangpur in Other Appeal No. 177 of 2007, which was transferred to the 1 sl Court of Additional District Judge, Rangpur for hearing, who after hearing, allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit.
7. Mr AJ Mohammad Ali, learned Advocate, appeared for the plaintiff-petitioner, submits that, plaintiff was appointed by the governing body of the said College as Vice Principal on 27-12-2001, he joined in the said post on 29-12-2001 and was working in such post while decision of the governing body of the college was taken on 11-9-2004 removing plaintiff from the post of vice-principal without any show cause notice which violated the principle of nahlral justice, learned Joint District Judge, 2nd Court, Rangpur committed no illegality in decreeing the suit which court of appeal below failed to consider. Learned Advocate further submits that plaintiff challenged the decision of the governing body making them as defendant No.2 who did not prefer any appeal, but defendant No. 1 filed the appeal who has no locus standi, as such, the appeal ought to be dismissed as the appeal was filed by a totally
incompetent person. Learned Advocate further submits that the impugned judgment and decree of the court of appeal below was passed in gross violation of the established principles of law, beyond the pleadings and assessment of evidence resulting in an error in decision occasioning failure of natural justice.
8. Mr Habibul Islam Bhuiyan, learned Advocate, appeared for the defendant-opposite parties, on the other hand, submits that, appointment of plaintiff as vice-principal, being on temporary basis, deserved no show cause notice prior to his removal from the post of vice-principal and reverted to substantive post of the plaintiff as Assistant Professor which, having not been affected, the plaintiff in any manner, which the learned Judge of the appellate court found and dismissed the suit in allowing the appeal and, as such, judgment having passed on consideration of materials on record, including plaint, written statement, exhibits and depositions of the witnesses, calls for no interference.
(To be continued)
(Civil Revisional Jurisdiction)
Sharif Uddin
Chaklader J
AKM Shahidul Huq J
Towhidur Rahman Md) Mandol Plain tiff-Respondent-Petitioner
vs
Principal, Rangpur Model College and others ………….Proforma-Defendant-Respondent Opposite-Parties”
Judgment July 30th, 2013.
Natural Justice
The expression “natural justice” may not be capable of precise definition. But the basic and fundamental requirements of “natural justice” are well known and have been repeatedly affirmed by courts of highest authority. Particular forms of legal procedure may not be necessary, but it is of the very essence of an enquiry and a decision that the person enquiring must be one without bias and should render the decision in a judicial spirit and in accordance with the principles of substantial justice. .. …. (14)
Jumuna Oil Company Ltd. vs SK Dey, 44 (AD) DLR 104; Bangladesh vs Commercial Trust of Bangladesh Ltd. 46 DLR (AD) 89; Mahinuddin vs Dhaka University 45 DLR 292; Professor Colam Azam vs Bangladesh, 45 DLR 423; Ehsanul Hoque vs General Manager, Agrani Bank, 42 DLR 60; Bangladesh vs Professor Colam Azam, 46 DLR (AD) 192; Bangladesh Steamer Agents Association vs Bangladesh, 33 DLR (AD) 177; Abul Hossain Akand (Md) vs Abul Kalam Azad, 49 DLR 257; Rafiqul Alam vs Secretary Ministry of Works, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, 49 DLR 456; Principal, Chittagong Medical College vs Shahrayar Murshed, 48 DLR (AD) 33; Shahrayar Murshed vs Chittagong Medical College, 48 DLR 482; Chairman, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Jessore vs Md AmiI’ Hossain, 56 DLR (AD) 24 and Md Idrisur Rahman vs Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs 29 BLD 32. = 61 DLR 523 ref.
AJ Mohammad Ali, and MG Mahmud Shahin, Advocates-For the Plaintiff-Respondent-Petitioner.
Habibul Islam Bhuiyan, Advocate-For the Proforma- Defendan t- Responden t-Opposite- Parties.
Judgment
Sharif Uddin Chaklader J: This Rule, at the instance of plaintiff, directed against judgment and decree dated 19-6-2011 passed by the learned Special District Judge, 1 sl Court, Rangpur allowing Title Appeal No. 177 of 2007 thereby dismissing Title Suit No. 27 of 2006 on reversing those dated 24-10-2007 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, 2nd Court, Rangpur, in charge of the Court of Senior Assistant Judge, Sadar, Rangpur.
2. Plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit praying for decree for declaration that as per decision of governing body of Rangpur Model College, plaintiff having been appointed as vice principal of the aforesaid college is in service as Vice Principal.
3. It is the case of plaintiff, in brief, that, Rangpur Model College was established in 1995 and later on, was affiliated as a Degree College in 1998, of which plaintiff was appointed as the Lecturer of Physics at the time of establishment of the college. The governing body of the college on 8-12-2001 took a resolution to appoint plaintiff as vice-principal of the col1ege, and consequently the appointment letter was issued on 27-12-2001 and plaintiff joined the post of vice-principal on 29-12-2001.
The governing body of the college by resolution dated 17-2-2002 decided to include plaintiff in the scheme of Monthly Pay Order, 1996. The governing body vide its resolution dated 27-72002 decided to send relevant papers to the concerned authority to pay salary to the plaintiff as vice-principal. In the meantime plaintiff carried out various duties of the college and put his signature as the vice-principal of the college from 29-12-2001 to 30-12-2004. The plaintiff on many occasions represented the college as the vice principal of the college. Plaintiff observed that his designation on the attendance registrar was penned through and was written as Assistant Professor from 1-10-2004 to 30-12-2004 against which, he raised objection on 4-1-2005. Defendant No.1 did not give any reply to the objection of the plaintiff. Plaintiff on 29-11-2005 filed application to the Chairman of the governing body for redress his grievances but in vain. Plaintiff on 20-12-2005 filed applications for casual leave and also on 21-12-2005 and 2212-2005 but defendant No.1 warned the plaintiff not to use the designation of vice-principal, against which plaintiff through his learned Advocate sent a legal notice upon the defendants on 26-12-2005 but of no effect, hence the suit.
4. The case of defendant No.1 is that, the governing body of the college appointed plaintiff as vice-principal purely on temporary basis, subject to the subsequent appointment as per rules of the National University; the notice for appointment was published in the daily ‘Juger Alo’ on 25-6-2002; 8 candidates including plaintiff filed application for the post of vice-principal; step was taken to have the representative present from National University as per rule; the college inspector vide memo dated 27-72003 refused the appointment raising the irregularities of the previous appointment of the plaintiff as Vice Principal; the governing body vide resolution dated 11-9-2004 was compelled to cancel the previous appointment of the plain- tiff as vice-principal; the matter was communicated to the plaintiff on 10-11-2004, plaintiff took it normally and used his designation as Assistant Professor on many occasions; plaintiff filed Writ Petition No. 8480 of 2005 as Assistant Professor to get his arrear salary; obtained his salary for the post of Assistant Professor; plaintiff himself prepared the bill in February, 2006 and received the same by using his designation as Assistant Professor.
5. In the suit, plaintiff examined 3 witnesses including himself, on the other hand. defendants examined 1 witness.
6. Learned Joint District Judge, 2nd Court, Rangpur, in charge of Senior Assistant Judge, Sadar, Rangpur by judgment and decree dated 24-10-2007 decreed the suit. Defendant No. 1 moved before the learned District Judge, Rangpur in Other Appeal No. 177 of 2007, which was transferred to the 1 sl Court of Additional District Judge, Rangpur for hearing, who after hearing, allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit.
7. Mr AJ Mohammad Ali, learned Advocate, appeared for the plaintiff-petitioner, submits that, plaintiff was appointed by the governing body of the said College as Vice Principal on 27-12-2001, he joined in the said post on 29-12-2001 and was working in such post while decision of the governing body of the college was taken on 11-9-2004 removing plaintiff from the post of vice-principal without any show cause notice which violated the principle of nahlral justice, learned Joint District Judge, 2nd Court, Rangpur committed no illegality in decreeing the suit which court of appeal below failed to consider. Learned Advocate further submits that plaintiff challenged the decision of the governing body making them as defendant No.2 who did not prefer any appeal, but defendant No. 1 filed the appeal who has no locus standi, as such, the appeal ought to be dismissed as the appeal was filed by a totally
incompetent person. Learned Advocate further submits that the impugned judgment and decree of the court of appeal below was passed in gross violation of the established principles of law, beyond the pleadings and assessment of evidence resulting in an error in decision occasioning failure of natural justice.
8. Mr Habibul Islam Bhuiyan, learned Advocate, appeared for the defendant-opposite parties, on the other hand, submits that, appointment of plaintiff as vice-principal, being on temporary basis, deserved no show cause notice prior to his removal from the post of vice-principal and reverted to substantive post of the plaintiff as Assistant Professor which, having not been affected, the plaintiff in any manner, which the learned Judge of the appellate court found and dismissed the suit in allowing the appeal and, as such, judgment having passed on consideration of materials on record, including plaint, written statement, exhibits and depositions of the witnesses, calls for no interference.
(To be continued)
