A compilation of PIL cases in Bangladesh

Case Number: Writ Petition No. 6302 of 2006
Home 9 PIL Cases 9 Case Number: Writ Petition No. 6302 of 2006
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Case Number: Writ Petition No. 6302 of 2006

Date of filing: 2006/07/05


  1. Bangladesh  Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST)
  2. Subimal Chakma
  3. Mrs. Dipali Chakma
  4. Amar BikashDey
  5. Surajoy Chakma
  6. Mrs. Ripa Chakma
  7. ParanLarmakar
  8. LaxmiRanjan Chakma
  9. Shanti Kumar Chakma
  10. Mrs. Munjulika Chakma
  11. Ananda Bijoy Chakma
  12. Gayan Kumar Chakma
  13. Angan Chakma
  14. Krishna Moni Chakma
  15. Mrs. Surhela Chakma
  16. Ratan Das
  17. BannaCharan Chakma
  18. Krishnajoy Chakma
  19. Mrs. Jahanara Begum
  20. Md. Ilias
  21. Mrs. Latika Chakma
  22. AbulKashem
  23. BinoyKishorKhaisha
  24. Pulin Bihari Chakma


  1. Secretary, Ministry of Land
  2. Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs
  3. Secretary, Ministry of Chittagong Hill Tracts Affairs
  4. DC,  Rangamati Hill District
  5. UNO, Rangamati Hill District
  6. AC (Land), Rangamati Hill District
  7. Council, Rangamati Hill District
  8. CHT Regional Council, Rangamati Hill District
  9. Deputy Collector, Rangamati Hill District
  10. Officer in Charge of Land and Settlement, Rangamati Hill District


BLAST, along with representatives of twenty-three landless families, filed a writ petition challenging the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Chittagong Hill Tracts (Land Acquisition) Regulation, 1958 and a notice issued under this section by the Land and Settlement Officer (Kanungo) on 03.08.2005 settling 15.99919 acres of Khas land at NolbuniaMauza, BarkalUpazilla of Rangamati in favour of the UpazillaParishad, Barkal. The petitioners had been living in the aforesaid area for fifteen to thirty years with the knowledge and permission of the concerned authority and had applied for settlement for their own occupied land. Their applications, along with a recommendation from the Headman, had been pending before the Deputy Commissioner. The whole process of settlement in favour of the UpazillaParishad was done secretly and without notifying the families. Indeed, they were orally assured that their land would be excluded from the settlement. The aggrieved families, on obtaining office copy of the impugned order made several representations, but received no response and feared eviction.


Date: 09/07/2006


The High Court issued a Rule Nisi on 09.07.2006 on the respondents to show cause why Section 3 of the Chittagong Hill Tracts (Land Acquisition) Regulation, 1958 should not be declared ultra vires to the Constitution and why the notice of eviction should not be declared to be made without any lawful authority and the operation of the notice was stayed for three months and the stay was extended for another three months on 16.10.2006.


Mr. Justice Syed Muhammad Dastagir Husain

Mr. Justice MamnoonRahman

Area of law




Relevant statute

Constitution, Articles 7 and 42;

Section 3 of the Chittagong Hill Tracts (Land Acquisition) Regulation, 1958;

Section 50 of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Regulation, 1900;

Section 64 of the Rangamati Hill District Council Act, 1989 as amended by Act 10 of 1998;

Acquisition and Requisition of Immovable Property Ordinance, 1982.

Database Last Updated on: 2017-02-12 15:26:45