Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006
Section 4, 117, 234 and 307
Section 200, 241A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Infringements of sections 4, 117 and 234 have not been made punishable in any other provisions under Chapter 19 of the Act No.42 of 2006. As such infringements of above provisions are punishable under section 307 of the Bangladesh Labour Ain, 2006 and subject to sentence of fine upto Tk.25,000/- ...Prof. Dr. Muhammad Yunus & ors Vs. The State & anr, (Criminal), 18 SCOB [2023] HCD 275 ....View Full Judgment

Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006
Section 4, 117, 234 and 319(5)
Labour Welfare Foundation Law, 2006
It is admitted that at the instance of the Collective Bargaining Agent of the Employees and Labour Union of the GTC Industrial Dispute Case No.1666 of 2019 has been filed and the same is still pending in the Labour Court for final settlement. But the learned Advocate for the petitioners could not show us any law which prevents the inspection of the GTC by an authorized Inspector and lodging of a complaint for violations of some provisions of Act No.42 of 2006 during pendency of above Industrial Dispute Case. As mentioned above this complaint has been filed under section 319(5) of Act No.42 of 2006 by an authorized Inspector alleging repeated violations of provisions of section 4, 117 and 234 of above Act by the GTC which is an important actor working in the telecommunication sector of Bangladesh. The petitioners are Chairman, Managing Director and Directors of the GTC. This is not a criminal case under the Penal Code instituted by a law of enforcement agency. On consideration of above materials on record we are unable to find any substances in the submissions of the learned Advocate for the petitioners that this case has been falsely instituted to tarnish the internationally acclaimed personality of petitioner No.1 who is a Nobel lauriate. ...Prof. Dr. Muhammad Yunus & ors Vs. The State & anr, (Criminal), 18 SCOB [2023] HCD 275 ....View Full Judgment

Article 102 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh
&
Section 216 (1)(Chha) of the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006:
We fail to understand how the learned Chairman of the Labour Appellate Tribunal, Dhaka could entertain the appeal of respondent no. 3 in the very first place when, admittedly, there was no judicial order under challenge. In our view, the appeal before the Labour Appellate Tribunal itself was absolutely misconceived and therefore not maintainable at all. ...L.B. Jute Mills Ltd Vs. Labour App. Tribunal & Ors., (Civil), 1 SCOB [2015] HCD 16 ....View Full Judgment

Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006
Section 303 (umo)
Labour Welfare Foundation Law, 2006
In view of specific allegations that the petitioners intentionally failed to create, maintain and send to the complainant the registers of leave, register of daily attendance, the register of overtime of the labourer and employees and register of works, we are unable to find any prima facie substance in the submissions of the learned Advocate for the petitioners that the framing of the charge under section 303 (umo) of Act No.42 of 2006 against the petitioners is without any lawful basis. ...Prof. Dr. Muhammad Yunus & ors Vs. The State & anr, (Criminal), 18 SCOB [2023] HCD 275 ....View Full Judgment

The alleged violations were first detected by the complainant on 09.02.2020. He issued a letter to the GTC for taking remedial measures. No satisfactory reply having received a second inspection was held on 16.08.2021 and again the same violations were discovered. This Complaint was filed in the concerned labor court on 28.08.2021. As such, it prima facie appears that this case has a date of occurrence and the same has been filed within six months from the date of occurrence as provided in Section 314 of Bangladesh Labor Ain, 2006. Moreover it is well settled that a question of limitation is a mixed question of law and facts which can be determined on consideration of evidence to be adduced at trial. ...Prof. Muhammad Yunus Vs. The State, (Criminal), 17 SCOB [2023] HCD 162 ....View Full Judgment