Staff Reporter :
The High Court on Monday raised question over the inaction of Finance Ministry and the Bangladesh Bank in issuing necessary directives for refunding the money of the e-commerce customers that stuck in different payment gateways.
The HC bench of Justice Md Mozibur Rahman Miah and Justice Md Kamrul Hossain Mollah issued ruling after hearing a writ petition that was filed seeking its directives over refunding the customers, money.
In the ruling the court asked the respondents to explain in four weeks as to why the failure or inaction of the finance ministry and the Bangladesh Bank in issuing necessary directives upon the five payment gateways, BKash, Nagad, SSL Wireless, Foster Payments and Shurjo Pay, for refunding the consumers money should not be declared illegal.
It also wanted to know from the respondents to explain as to why the finance ministry and the Bangladesh Bank should not be directed to issue necessary directives upon the five payment gateways, BKash, Nagad, SSL Wireless, Foster Payments and Shurjo Pay, for refunding the consumers money withheld or kept by them.
Finance Ministry, the governor of the Bangladesh Bank, general manager of the Payment Systems Department of that bank, the director-general of the World Trade Organisation cell of the commerce ministry, chief executive officers of mobile financial service provider BKash and Nagad, payment gateway SSL Wireless, Foster Pay, and Surjo Pay have been asked to comply with the ruling.
Conscious Consumers Society (CCS), a consumer rights group, filed the writ on October 21 seeking HC directives for the refund of money to e-commerce customers that has stuck in payment gateways.
Barrister Sabrina Zarin and Barriser Abdul Qaium appeared in the hearing on behalf of the petitioner, while deputy attorney general Nawroz Md Russel Chowdhury represented the state.
Lawyer Sabrina later said, “Thousands of customers invested money in e-commerce platforms. As per rule if anyone doesn’t get the product, he/she would get the money back. But the money invested by the customers was not refunded. As a result, the customers have fallen in uncertainty over the refund of their money.”
“Even the concerned authorities have no headache over the matter. That’s why we filed a writ petition seeking HC directives. After hearing, the court issued a rule,” added the lawyer.
