Labor Law case solution by Ranjit Biswas student of BSMRSTU Dept. of management studies

1. 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 workerwithout 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. (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 workerof 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.

3. 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 hima notice to explain
the reason of hisabsent 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.

4. 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 workeris 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,

5. 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 Biswas
Senior lawer,
Bangladesh Supreme Court
High 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?

6. 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 orprovident 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 BANGLADESH
HIGH COURT DIVISION
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
WRIT PETITION NO.5684 OF 2010
IN THE MATTER OF:

7. 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 peterson
Managing Director
PKB garments company, Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Case-08.

8. 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?

9. 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

10. 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 orestablishment 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 undersub-section
(1) any other section or department is so affected that it is not possible to keep that section ordepartment
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 conspicuousplace 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

11. 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 hima notice to explain
the reason of hisabsent 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

12. 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 dismissed
under 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 orwithout subsistence allowance fora 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,

13. (c) discriminate against any workerin 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:

14. (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 workerdoes not lose the ability to work,in whole or in part, fora 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 provisionsof 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.”

15. 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 orrefuse to keep in employment any workeron the ground that such worker
is, or is not, a member or officer of a trade union;
Section 20: Retrenchment-
(4) Where a workerof any particularcategory is required to be retrenched, the employershall,in
the absence of any agreement between himand 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:-18
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH
HIGH COURT DIVISION
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
WRIT PETITION NO.5684 OF 2010
IN 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,

16. 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.