Case solutions:-01:

We can analysis this case under section 26. Termination of employment of worker by an employer

otherwise than by dismissal, etc.

Under section-26(1) of the Bangladesh Labor Law-2006, The employment of a permanent worker may be

terminated by an employer, otherwise than in the manner provided elsewhere in this Chapter, by giving

him a notice in writing, of

(a) one hundred and twenty days’ notice, if he is a monthly rated worker;

According to subsection-3 of section-26 of the Bangladesh Labor Law-2006,

Where an employer intends to terminate the employment of a worker without any notice, he may do so by

paying the worker wages for the period of notice, in lieu of the notice, under sub-section (1) or (2).

Under section-26(4) of the Bangladesh Labor Law-2006,,

Where the employment of a permanent worker is terminated under this section, he shall be paid by the

employer compensation at the rate of 30 (thirty) days wages for his every completed year of service or

gratuity, if payable, whichever is higher, and this compensation shall be in addition to any other benefit

which is payable to such worker under this Act.

In this case, Mr. Dauud was a head clark-com-accountant under Jamed Finly Company Limited at

Khulna. He was employed there six years and his service was terminated allowing him wages in lieu of

90 days’ notice. According to the law The Company can terminate the employment of a permanent

worker by giving a notice of 120 days or paying wages to him in lieu of 120 days’ notice at the rate of 30

days wage for every completed year in addition to the compensation. But the James Finly Company Ltd.

terminated his employment allowing him wages in lieu of 90 days’ notice at the rate of 14 days wages.

So, they have violated the provisions of section-26 of the Bangladesh Labor Law-2006. The challenge

that had been raised by mr. dauud is valid. So, James Finly Company Ltd is laible to pay him at the rate of

30 days wage for every completed year in lieu of 14 days wages in addition to the compensation.

Case solutions:-02

Najimuddin was a wielding worker. He was injured to his eye due to spark. He was properly trained about

safety and knew about the preventive measures. He was also provided all necessary equipment and tools

to take protection from any harm caused at the workplace. The company also exhibited a notice (in

English) properly. The Company wanted to avoid the liability of such accidental compensation under

chapter 6: safety and Section 150 Liability of the employer to pay compensation-

(2) An employer shall not be liable to pay such compensation, if-

(b) the cause of injury to a worker, not resulting in death, by the accident directly attributed to-

(i) the worker having been at that time under the influence of drink or drugs

(ii) the willful disobedience by the worker of a clear order or to rules made for the

purpose of securing the safety of workers; ,

(iii) the willful removal or disregard by the worker of any safety guard or other device

which he knew to have been provided for the purpose of securing the safety of workers.

Though the organization took all necessary steps for the safty for the workers, it is not proved that he was

drank 150-2(b,i) , willfully disobeded any order150-2(b,ii) or willful removed any safety guard 150-

2(b,iii)Bsides this, Though the employer took all safety measures, there are previous case reference that

support to Mr. Najimuddin. The safety caution is not enough for avoiding the liability according to case

“Finch Telegraph construction & Mointenance co. Ltd.(1949 ALL ER 452)”

Last of all there was a notice board which was written on English. But the employer should write it on

Bengali. So, Mr. Najimuddin ihas the right to get compensation from the organization.

Case-03.

A worker, Mr. Jahir of an industry establishment went on leave but remained absent from duties without permission for a period exceeding 10 days whereupon the employer by notice terminated his service by issuing a notice as “ we find that you are granted casual leave for two days, with effect from 14.02.2016 to 15.02.2016. Subsequently, you pray for one month leave with effect from 16.02.2016 to 15.03.2016. On ground of your illness and you did not join workplace after the end of the leave. Moreover, since you had failed to return within 10 days from the date of expiry of leave, you had been terminated under the section-23, BLC-2006. You may collect your dues from our accounts department on any day during office hours. Mr. Jahir challenged the action before Lbor Court. Explain the consequences under the provisions of BLC-2006.

Case solutions:-3:

In this case Mr. Jahir but remained absent from duties without permission for a period exceeding 10 days.

For this reason the employer terminated him under the section-23, BLC-2006.

Section 23 (4-d) of Bangladesh labor Code 2006, “habitual absence without leave or absence for more

than 10 (ten) days at a time without obtaining leave” shall be considered as misconduct. This section

provides right to the employers to terminate the worker by notice.

But, After 2013, the employee can get a chance to challenge this treatment under section 27, sub section

3(A) [ins.. By Act 30 of 2013]

“Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3), if a worker remains absent from his work place

for more than 10 (ten) days without notice or permission, the employer shall serve him a notice to explain

the reason of his absent and join the service within 10 (ten) days and, in such case, if the worker does not

submit any written explanation or join the service within the stipulated time, the employer shall give him

further 7 (seven) days’ time to defend himself, and thereupon if the worker does not join the service or

defend himself, he shall be deemed to have been released from service on and from the date of such

absence.” [ins.. By Act 30 of 2013]

So Mr. Jahir can claim for more 7 days to defense himself and the employer is liable under Bangladesh

Labor Act to give him an additional chance to join the service or defend himself.

Case-04.

Mr. Fariduddin, a skilled machinist, was injured during the shifting a machine belt. As a result of the accident, his lefty leg was fractured severely. It was so rigorous that he is unable to bend his knee. He can neither walk nor run. But he can walk with the help of stick or crutch. Thus, he can visit a few distance. As a result the physician registered, Mr. Farid unfit for any active physical work as a machine operator. The employer wants to compensate Mr. Farid complying all legal-social-ethical imperatives and thus shifting an example of pioneer in the compensation world. Construct an exemplary policy framework for the company.

Case solutions:-4:

In the case Mr. Farid Uddin was injured in the time of his working in the factory and he was registered as

unfit for any active physical work as a machine operator.

To solve this problem we can follow Bangladesh Labor Code 2006, chapter 12 which describes about

compensation for injury caused by accident. Very beginning of this chapter section 150 explain the

responsibility of employers.

Section 150 Liability of the employer to pay compensation.

(1) If a worker is bodily injured by an accident arising out of the course of his employment, his employer

shall be liable to pay him compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter.

Where section 151 says about the amount of compensation in Bangladesh Labor Code 2006.

Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, the amount of compensation shall be as follows, namely:

(b) Where permanent total disablement results from the injury-

(i) [Irrespective of the worker is adult or minor], the sum mentioned in the third column of the

Fifth Schedule;

According to the First Schedule list of injuries deemed to result in permanent partial disablement in

Bangladesh Labour Law 2006, Loss of 1 (one) hand or one leg, 100 Percentage of loss of earning

capacity. That means Mr. Fariduddin is permanently total disablement for the injury.

So, according to the third column of the Fifth Schedule the amount of compensation In case of permanent

total disablement is Tk/-1,25,000. Mr. Fariduddin will get compensation Tk/-1,25,000 for his permanent

total disablement injury.

Case-05.

Mr. Rfique works as a permanent worker of ABC group of industry. The management stopped monthly

wages since January 2016. He comes to you to discuss about the realization of his due wages. Draft a

letter on behalf of Mr. Rfique.

Case solutions:-5

26/10/2016

Head of Human Resource Department

ABC group of industry

Gopalgonj, Dhaka

Dear sir,

This letter is a formal demand for the payment of my unpaid wages . My unpaid wages include work

which was performed for January 2016 to October 2016. I was employed as a permanent worker, and am

owed for approximately ten months. I requested full payment of my unpaid wages from you, [boss's

name], but I have not yet received it. According to the Bangladesh Labor Code, I am to be paid in full by

the next scheduled pay day in accordance with the law.

Sec 121. Responsibility for payment of wages.

Every employer shall be liable to pay to workers employed by him all wages required to be paid under

this Act (bangladesh labour act, 2006).

Sec 123. Time of payment of wages.

(1) The wages of a worker shall be paid before the expiry of the seventh working day following the last

day of the wage period in respect of which the wages is payable.

Accordingly, in the event that I do not receive full payment of the above-referenced amount within 7 days

of hereof, I shall seek to enforce all of my available rights and remedies in accordance with the applicable

laws.

This is an attempt to collect a debt; any information will be used for that purpose.

Sincerely,

Mr Rafiq

prepared by Ranjit BiswasSenior lawer,

Bangladesh Supreme CourtHigh court division.

Case-06.

In an establishment here are three registered trade union X, Y & Z. out of which X is a CBA (collective

bargaining agent).Z is submitted the 6 point demand to the management but the management no heed to

it. What is the remedy available to Z?

Case solutions:-6

In the case X is CBA and Z submit 6 point demand to solve this problem we can focus the bangladesh

labour act, 2006

According to Section 202(16 and 24) in the bangladesh labour act, 2006

(16) Where a trade union is declared to be the collective bargaining agent for an establishment under

sub-section (15)(e), it shall be the collective bargaining agent for that establishment for 2 (two) years

from the date of such declaration,

(24) A collective bargaining agent in relation to an establishment to which it relates shall be entitled to

(a) Bargain with the employer in matters of the state of jobless, conditions of work or environment of

work of the workers;

(b) Represent all or any of the workers in any proceedings;

(c) Give notice of, and declare, a strike in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter;

(d) Nominate representatives of the workers in any welfare institution or provident fund and in the board

of trustees of the workers participation fund established under Chapter XV; and

(e) Conduct cases on behalf of any individual worker or a group of workers under this Act.

As trade union Z does not follow the legal procedure for claiming their demand, there demands are not

valid. If trade union Z wants to demand any clam it should raise it by the CBA agent.

Case-07.

The owner of an industrial plant wants to prepare appeal to labor appellate tribunal about the award of

first labor court, Chittagong. Draft a letter for advice to him with reference to provision of Bangladesh

labor law 2006.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESHHIGH COURT DIVISION

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)WRIT PETITION NO.5684 OF 2010

IN THE MATTER OF:

An application under Bangladesh labour laws

Section 13: Closure of establishment

and IN THE MATTER OF:

PKB garments company vs

First labour court Chittagong

Present:

Mr. Justice Ranjit Biswas Heard on: 15.04.2016, 18.04.2016,

My Lord,

Threre is an industrial plant name PKB garments company which is situated in Chittagon. There was good working environment and the labour were also satisfied with their wages and the other facilities of that industry.

Suddenly some workers claim some demand which were illogical to the authority. So they did not pay any hid to them. After that, almost all workers called strike. For this reason the authority decided to close the plan by following Bangladesh Labor Law 2006 section 13(1): Closure of establishment. [(1) An employer may, in the event of an illegal strike in any section or department of any establishment, close down either wholly or partly such section or establishment and in cases of such closure the workers participated in the strike shall not be paid any wages.]

The works went to first labor court Chittagong and the court said to pay compensation to the worker who were not involve with the strike. Under section 13(2) [Where by reason of closing down of any section or department of any establishment under sub-section (1) any other section or department is so affected that it is not possible to keep that section or department open, that section or department may also be closed down and the workers affected thereby shall be paid wages equal to the amount of compensation payable in the case of lay-off upto a period of 3 (three) days and for any period exceeding thereto may not get any wages. ]But most of the workers joint to the strike and all of them claim their compensation. now the company is in a dilemma.The first labour court provide a statement against Karim jute industry by showing some previous case reference.Now authority of PKB Garments Company wants to raise this case in the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. It is requested to the master for taking the case as emergency and to take steps to raise the case in the Supreme Court of Bangladesh.

Sincerely,

Mr. Devid petersonManaging DirectorPKB garments company, Chittagong, Bangladesh.

Case-08.

Mr. kuddus, a worker, was returning home by his company’s bus. On the way he got down, later he met

an accident while the crossing the road. And was seriously injured.is he entitled to get compensation from

the company?

Mr. Kuddus, was returning home by his company bus. On the way he got down. Later he met an accident

while crossing the road and he was seriously injured. He is not entitled to get compensation from the

company because according to Bangladesh Lobor Law 2006, chapter XII section 150

Employer’s Liability for compensation: If personal injury is caused to worker by accident arising out of

and in the course of his employment, his employer shall be liable to pay compensation in accordance with

the provisions. So in this case we see that Mr. Kuddus met an accident after got down from the company

bus. If his injury occurred due to staying in the company bus, the company shall be liable for giving him

compensation. It is Mr. Kuddus responsibility to cross the road carefully. He was not careful and met an

accident. So Mr. Kuddus shall not get compensation from company. But the company shall give him sick

leave.

Case-9.

X, Y, Z sramik union is the only union of ABC factory.it has its member more then 1/3 of the total

number workers employed in the factory. Examine whether this union can claim the status of CBA under

the act of Bangladesh labor law 2006.

Case solutions:-9

By following the Bangladesh Labor Law, Section 202 Collective bargaining agent, we can explain

whether X, Y, Z sramik union can claim the status of Collective Bargaining Agent(CBA) of the factory

or not.

In Section 202(1) “where there is only one trade union in an establishment, that trade union shall, be

deemed to be collective bargaining agent for such establishment.”

X, Y, Z sramik union is the only union of ABC factory. Beside this, its member is more than one third of

the total number of the workers of the factory. So, under the Bangladesh Labor Law Section 202 (1) X, Y,

Z sramik union can claim the status of Collective Bargaining Agent(CBA) of the factory.

Case-10.

Mr. Monju a worker of Surma manufacturing company was severely hurt but the exploration of boiler &

admitted into hospital where doctor said that he had lost his one hand & a foot. How would you determine

compensation?

Case solutions:-10

In the case . Mr. Monju a worker of Surma manufacturing company was severely hurt by the exploration

of boiler in the factory and doctor said that he had lost his one hand & a foot.

To solve this problem we can follow Bangladesh Labor Code 2006, chapter 12 which describes about

compensation for injury caused by accident. Very beginning of this chapter section 150 explain the

responsibility of employers.

Section 150: Liability of the employer to pay compensation.

(1) If a worker is bodily injured by an accident arising out of the course of his employment, his employer

shall be liable to pay him compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter.

Where section 151 says about the amount of compensation in Bangladesh Labor Code 2006.

(c) Where permanent partial disablement results from the injury-

(i) in the case of injury specified in the First Schedule, such percentage of the compensation which would

have been payable in the case of permanent total disablement which is equal to the ratio specified therein

as being the percentage of the loss of earning capacity caused by that injury.

Here Mr. Monju had lost his one hand & a foot. In the First Schedule Serial No. 2. Loss of 1 (one) hand

or one leg the percentage of loss of earning capacity is 100%.

Case-11.

Mr. Tausif was a worker of finishing department of a factory & as a result of strike by the worker of

waving department of his factory, the management has to close the power of finishing department &

subsequently the worker are affected by such closer and not paid by the management for the stick

period.do the action is valid in the eyes of law?

Case solutions:-11

In the case , one department was stoped for strike of other depertment.By following Bangladesh Labour

Code 2006, Section 13 any employer has right to close down either wholly or partly any section or

department of the establishment for the reason of strike of other department. At the same time employer

has right to stop wages for any period exceeding in the case of lay-off upto a period of 3 (three) days.

In Bangladesh Labour Code 2006, Section 13: Closure of establishment

(1) An employer may, in the event of an illegal strike in any section or department of any establishment,

close down either wholly or partly such section or establishment and in cases of such closure the workers

participated in the strike shall not be paid any wages.

(2) Where by reason of closing down of any section or department of any establishment under sub-section

(1) any other section or department is so affected that it is not possible to keep that section or department

open, that section or department may also be closed down and the workers affected thereby shall be paid

wages equal to the amount of compensation payable in the case of lay-off upto a period of 3 (three) days

and for any period exceeding thereto may not get any wages.

(3) The employer shall notify the fact of such closure, as soon as practicable, by a notice posted or hung

on the notice board in the section or department concerned or at a conspicuous place in the establishment

and the fact of resumption of work shall likewise be notified.

So, the management action is valid on the eye of BLC 2006 in the Mr. Tausif’s establishment. But here is

a point that for closing finishing department for the strike of weaving department, Mr. Tausif shall be paid

wages equal to the amount of compensation payable in the case of lay-off upto a period of 3 (three) days

and for any period exceeding thereto may not get any wages.

Case-12.

One Mr. Hasem, who was a worker of Jamuna manufacturing company, went on leave but remain absent

from duties for a period of 10 days. After the expiry of authorized leaves. Hence, the employers, by notice

terminated his Lyn by his service. Examine the validity of termination of Lyn and discussed the effects of

authorized leave.

Case solutions:-12

In this case Mr. Hashem went on a leave but remain absent from duties for a period of 10 days, after

expire of authorized leave. For this reason the employer terminated him by notice under the section-23,

BLC-2006.

Section 23 (4-d) of Bangladesh labor Code 2006, “habitual absence without leave or absence for more

than 10 (ten) days at a time without obtaining leave” shall be considered as misconduct. This section

provides right to the employers to terminate the worker by notice.

But, After 2013, the employee can get a chance to challenge this treatment under section 27, sub section

3(A) [ins.. By Act 30 of 2013]

“Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3), if a worker remains absent from his work place

for more than 10 (ten) days without notice or permission, the employer shall serve him a notice to explain

the reason of his absent and join the service within 10 (ten) days and, in such case, if the worker does not

submit any written explanation or join the service within the stipulated time, the employer shall give him

further 7 (seven) days’ time to defend himself, and thereupon if the worker does not join the service or

defend himself, he shall be deemed to have been released from service on and from the date of such

absence.” [ins.. By Act 30 of 2013]

So it is clear that, By the Bangladesh labor Code 2006 the termination of Mr. Hashem is not valid and

he can claim for more 7 days to defense himself and the employer is liable under Bangladesh Labor Act

to give him an additional chance to join the service or defend himself.

Case-13.

A worker was charge sheeted for misconduct asks to reply within two days of the receipt of the same.

Just on receipt of a reply the employer dismissed the worker .discussed the legality of the employer.

Case solutions:-13

In this case a worker is dismissed for his misconduct. The case is under Bangladesh Labour Act 2006,

capter 2 section 23 & 24.Under the Bangladesh Labor Law Section 24 “Procedure for Punishment” the

dismissal of the worker by the employer with two days’ notice is illegal.

Section 24 (1) declared that, No order of punishment under section 23 shall be made against a worker

unless-

(a) the allegation against him is recorded in writing;(b) he is given a copy of the allegation and a period of at least 7 (seven) days is given to explain;(c) he is given an opportunity of being heard;(d) he is found guilty after an enquiry made by the enquiry committee consisting of equal number of representatives of the employer and the worker:Provided that such enquiry shall be concluded within 60 (sixty) days.](e) the employer or the manager approves the order of dismissal.Here, the worker was dismissed by the employer with two days’ notice for his misconduct. But the

Section 24 (1) has described a procedure for punishment for misconduct which is not followed by the

employer where employer have to give not less than seven days and need an investigation to prove him

guilty . So, according to Section 24 of the Bangladesh Labor Law-2006 the dismissal of the worker by the

employer for his misconduct is not legal. The workman kept under suspension and subsequently

dismissed with retro spective effect. [1994 PLC 289]

There is another way of treating the employee under section 23(2)

(2) A worker found guilty of misconduct may, instead of being dismissedunder sub-section (1), under any extenuating circumstances, be awarded any of the following punishments, namely:-(a) Removal;(b) Reduction to a lower post, grade or scale of pay for a period not exceeding 1 (one) year;(c) Stoppage of promotion for a period not exceeding 1 (one) year;(d) Withholding of increment for a period not exceeding 1 (one) year;(e) Fine;(f) Suspension without wages or without subsistence allowance for a period not exceeding 7 (seven) days;

Case-14.

Mr. karim is a general secretary of a resisted trade union .recently he has been transfer in another unit &

accordingly he has made over changes of his duties. Can Mr Karim raise an industrial dispute now?

Case solutions:-14

Here Mr. Karim is a general secretary of a registered trade union .recently he has been transferred in

another unit. If such kind of condition raise then the responsibility of the employer is clearly noted in

Bangladesh Labour Act- 2006, Section 195: Unfair Labour practices on the part of the employers.

Section- 195(c), Bangladesh Labour Act- 2006,

(c) discriminate against any worker in regard to any employment, promotion, conditions of employment

or working conditions on the ground that such worker is, or is not, a member or officer of a trade union;

In this case, Mr. Karim is a general secretary of a registered trade union and he has been transferred in

another unit by the employer which goes against the Section 195(c) of BLA 2006.

For this reason Mr. Karim can raise an industrial dispute and the procedure is described under Section

209 in the chapter: XIV. “No industrial dispute shall be deemed to exist, unless it is raised by an employer

or by a collective bargaining agent.”

In this ground, Mr. Karim have to raise an industrial dispute through registered CBA of his industrial

establishment.

Case-15.

Mamun, age 13 years has been serving as a canteen boy over 3 years in Hafij jute miles Ltd, Khalishpur

Kulna. while returning to factory canteen from the house of DGM near by the factory premises. He was

stuck by a bullet & die on the spot .Can Mamun’s heirs claim compensation on the ground that he had

died arising out of an in the course of employment?

Case solutions:-15

In this case mamun is 13 years old. According to Bangladesh Labor Law (2006), he a child. [ Child: a

person who has not completed his fourteenth year of age]

There is a specific direction in the Bangladesh Labor Law section no.34: Restrictions on employment of

children and adolescents of employing child in any establishment.

Section no.34 (1), no child shall be employed or permitted to work in any occupation or establishment.

Here, According to law Mamun is not a worker of Hafij Jute Miles Ltd, Khalishpur, Kulna. On the

ground of Mamun’s death by a bullet, the heirs of Mamun can not claim compensation.

Case-16:

Mr. Hasan Working Karnaphuli Paper Mills Ltd. One day when he was gossiping with his colleague he

become careless. His shirt caught hold of by the loom machine. And as a results of the sustain injury and

died.Discus the employers’ liability.

Bangladesh Labour Law 2006, Chapter: XII, Section 150 has described about Employer’s Liability to pay

compensation and some cases employer shall not be liable to pay compensation. The details of the

subsection 1 & 2 under Section 150 are:

(1) If a worker is bodily injured by an accident arising out of the course of his employment, his employer

shall be liable to pay him compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter.

(2) An employer shall not be liable to pay such compensation, if-

(a) a worker does not lose the ability to work, in whole or in part, for a period exceeding three days due

to injury;

(b) the cause of injury to a worker, not resulting in death, by the accident directly attributed to

1. the worker having been at that time under the influence of drink or drugs;

2. the willful disobedience by the worker of a clear order or to rules made for the purpose of

securing the safety of workers; ,

3. the willful removal or disregard by the worker of any safety guard or other device which he knew

to have been provided for the purpose of securing the safety of workers.

In this case Mr. Hasan didn’t do anything which was described in Subsection 2 under Section 150. So, it

can be told that employer is liable for Mr. Hasan’s unconscious accident result of death and employer

have to pay compensation to Mr. Hasan’s nominee according to Section 151 Amount of compensation.

(1) Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, the amount of compensation shall be as follows, namely:

(a) Where death results from the injury, the sum mentioned in the second column of the Fifth Schedule

[Provided that this amount of compensation shall be in addition to the compensation relating to his normal retrenchment of, dismissal from, termination of, or resignation from, service;]

According to the sum mentioned in the second column of the Fifth Schedule In case of death the

employer is liable to pay compensation Tk/-1,00,000 to the Mr. Hasan’s Nominee for his workplace

death.

Case 17:

Mr karim was senior worker and active trade unionist of a Chittagong based steel factories and the

management of the factory retrenched 20 workers including Mr karim on the ground of redundancy. Mr

karim is now thinking to challenge his retrenchment on the ground that the few workers who are junior to

him ware not retrenched. As the management in such a situation justify in retrenching of Mr karim.

Employer has right to retrench worker on the ground of redundancy According to Section-20(1) of the

Bangladesh Labor Law-2006.

“Any worker may be retrenched from service of any establishment on the ground of redundancy.”

But the problem is Mr. Karim was senior worker and active trade unionist and management had not

retrenched few workers who are junior to him. Which is described in Section 195 and Section 20(4).

Which is given below one by one:

Section 195: Unfair Labour practices on the part of the employers.

“No employer or the trade union of employers or any person acting on their behalf shall-

(b) refuse to employ or refuse to keep in employment any worker on the ground that such worker

is, or is not, a member or officer of a trade union;

Section 20: Retrenchment-

(4) Where a worker of any particular category is required to be retrenched, the employer shall, in

the absence of any agreement between him and the worker in this behalf, retrench the worker who was

the last person to be employed in that category.”

By this two section Mr. Karim’s retrenchment is not valid and unjustified. Now, Mr. Karim can challenge

against the retrenchment and compel to the management for re-employment him.

Case-18:

The owner of an industrial plant wants to prepare a writ petition to the high court division of Bangladesh

Supreme Court against the first labour court Chittagong. Draft a letter of advice with reference of law

against Bangladesh labour court.

Case solutions:-18IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH

HIGH COURT DIVISION(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION NO.5684 OF 2010IN THE MATTER OF:

An application under Bangladesh labour laws section 150: Liability of the employer to pay compensation

and IN THE MATTER OF:

Karim jute industry vs

First labour court Chittagong Present:Mr. Justice Ranjit Biswas Heard on: 05.07.2016, 06.07.2016,My Lord,

Mr. Rocky is a skilled worker. He is working as a operator for seven years. Suddenly he sustained injury

to his head due to heavy waited steel rode. He was properly trained about safety and knew about the

preventive measures. He was also provided all necessary equipment and tools to take protection from any

harm caused at the workplace. the company also exhibited a notice properly. The company wanted to

avoid the liability of such accidental compensation according to Bangladesh labor Code 2006 section 150:

Liability of the employer to pay compensation. Beacause the company follow all the direction that

provided in chapter 6: safety in the law. But mr. Rocky claimed his compensation to first labor court

Chittagong.

The first labour court provide a statement against Karim jute industry by showing some previous case

reference.

Now authority of Karim jute industry wants to raise this case in the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. It is

requested to the master for taking the case as emergency and to take steps to raise the case in the Supreme

Court of Bangladesh.

Sincerely,

Mr. Adul Mozid

Managing Director

Karim jute industry

Chittagong, Bangladesh.