Decided on June 14,1995

Government Of Bangladesh Appellant
MD. ABDUL KARIM Respondents


A.T.M.AFZAL,J. - (1.) This appeal by leave at the instance of the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice and Parliamentary Affairs arises out of a proceeding under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1980 (Act No.VII of 1981) and is from the judgment and order dated 27.11.1993 passed by the Administrative Appellate Tribunal, Dhaka in Appeal No. 33 of 1993 upholding those of the Administrative Tribunal, Bogra passed in AT Case No. 27 of 1992.
(2.) Facts of the case, briefly, are, that the respondent Md. Abdul Karim, who was an Accountant-cum-Bench Assistant in the First Court of Munsif, Sirajgonj District Pabna at the relevant time, was tried by a Summary Martial Law Court under Regulation No. 11 of Martial Law Regulation No.1 of 1992 for allegedly taking a bribe of Taka 25.00 from a party, convicted thereunder on 14.11.1982 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Taka 500.00 in default to RI for two months more. The Zonal Martial Law Authority reduced the sentence to a fine of Taka 200.00 in default to RI for three months. On 30.11.1982 the District Judge, Pabna started a Departmental Proceeding, Case No.7 of 1982, against the respondent on the basis of the aforesaid case which ended in his conviction. The Subordinate Judge, Sirajgonj who was appointed Enquiry Officer in the proceeding by his report dated 31.3.1983 found the respondent not guilty under rule 3(c) of the Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1976, briefly, the Rules. The District Judge, however, did not agree with the opinion of the Enquiry Officer and by an order passed on 8.5.1983 retired the respondent compulsorily from service under rule 4(3)(b) of the said Rules. Respondent took an appeal against the said order to the appellant but the same was (allegedly) dismissed on 20.1.1991 whereupon the respondent filed the aforesaid case before the Administrative Tribunal on 10.2.1991 for setting aside the order of compulsory retirement and for a direction to reinstate him in service with all arrear salaries, etc.
(3.) The appellant contested the case by filing a written objection stating, inter alia, therein that the order of compulsory retirement was legally passed and confirmed in appeal because of the respondent's conviction on a criminal charge in a Martial Law Court.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.