The Public Servants (Retirement) Act, 1974
Section 2(d), 9(2).
The Government is the only authority to make such order of premature retirement on completion of 25 years of service under section 9(2) of Act 12 of the 1974 and the respondent no. 2 in exercise of purported power under section 5(Kha) of the pension and General Provident Fund Rules, 1987 had no authority and power to retire him pre- maturely from the service. Cap. (Ret.) B. Akram Ahmed Khan Chowdhury (1) vs Bangladesh (1) (M. M. Ruhul Amin J(Civil) 2ADC 921
The Public Servants (Retirement) Act, 1974
There is no doubt that sub-clause (vi) of clause (d) of section 2 of Act No. XII of 1974 excludes a person holding any office the tenure of which is determined by or under any law from the mischief of Act No. XII of 1974. The appellant's tenure of office is admittedly governed by section 35 of East Pakistan Ordinance No. XXIII of 1961. In that view of the matter we find that the con- tention of the appellant has substance and the High Court Division erred in law in not adverting to his submission of the appellant. Dewan Abdul Khaleque vs. Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary (Mustafa Kamal J(Civil) 4ADC 383
The Public Servants (Retirement) Act, 1974
Section 3
The High Court Division cannot, grant the prayer of petition by giving substan- tial part of the relief while adjudication of the substantive matter is still await- ing. Chairman, BADC vs S.M. Ali Imam (Md.Ruhul Amin J)(Civil) 2ADC 503
The Public Servants (Retirement) Act, 1974
Section 9(1)
Did not allow the plaintiff the benefit of leave preparatory to retirement and thus caused him a financial loss to the tune of about Tk.50 lakhs.
High Court Division committed an illegality in withdrawing the suit from the trial Court to the High Court Division without assigning any reason, without following the requirements of law and without so much as giving an opportunity to the learned Advocate for the appellants to place the appellants' point of view thus causing great prejudice to the appellants. Government of Bangladesh and another vs. Md. Raziur Rahman Chowdhury (Mustafa Kamal J) (Civil) 4ADC 329
Public Servants (Retirement) Act, 1974
Section 9(2), 2(d), 2(d)(i) & (vi)
Considering the overriding nature of section 3 of the Act it can be very well said that whatever be the provision of any regulation or by-law, the Regulations under which the writ petitioners seek cover will not prevail if it is inconsistent with the Act. Bangladesh Biman Corporation vs. Md. Zainul Abedin and ors. (Bimalendu Bikash Roy Choudury J) (Civil) 4ADC 31
Section 9(2)
The aforesaid findings of the High Court Division are based on proper consideration of the relevant provision of the law and of the materials on record. Therefore no interference is called for. Biman Bangladesh Airlines vs. A.Κ.Μ. Mazharul Haq Chowdhury (Syed Mah- mud Hossain J) (Civil) 8 ADC 460
Public Servants (Retirement) Act 1974
The subsequent amendment to the Public Servants (Retirement) Act 1974 will not be automatically incorporated in the Service Regulations of the Bank, until and unless the Bank chooses to adopt the same by amending the relevant Service Regulations. Pubali Bank Ltd VS Abdur Rashid Miah & others, [I LM (AD) 420]
Public Servants (Retirement) Act 1974- There was no finding that the petitioners had any such legal right to have their period of service extended up to 59 years of their age. Indeed, in our view the Bank giving such benefits to its employees by means of a circular post dates the writ petitioners' superannuation and is, therefore, not applicable in their case. Pubali Bank Ltd -VS- Abdur Rashid Miah & others, [1 LM (AD) 420]
