DIRD WASHING PLANT LTD. Vs. GOVERNMENT OF BANGLADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On an application under Article 102(2)(a)(ii) of the Constitution of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh the following Rule was issued-

(2.) Mr. Md. Aminul Huq, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that respondent no. 5, Ruhul Amin, has got no lawful authority to conduct the case on behalf of the respondent no. 4, Md. Kamal Uddin, as he is not an enrolled Advocate under the Bangladesh Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Order, 1972.

(3.) Mr. Huq submits further that though the respondent no. 5 as an authorized person on behalf of the respondent no. 4 conducting the case on his behalf under the provision of section 220 of the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006, but he is conducting the same like a lawyer which is in contravention with the Bangladesh Legal practitioners and Bar Council Order, 1972 and hence the impugned order allowing the respondent no.5 to conduct the case on behalf of the respondent no. 4 is liable to be declared to have been passed without lawful authority and is of no legal effect.