Promotion of 6 officials: IG prison, home secy apologises for violating SC order
Inspector General of Prisons ASM Anisul Haque and Home Secretary (Security Service Division) Abdullah Al Masud Chowdhury today apologised unconditionally to the Supreme Court for violating its directive to promote six prison officials to posts of senior jail superintendent.
The two senior officials apologised after appearing before a six-member bench of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Obaidul Hassan.
The apex court accepted their apology and exonerated them from personal appearance before it in connection with this case.
The SC also directed them to comply with its directive on the promotion by February 4 next year as they told the court that they would gradually implement the directive.
It set February 4 for passing further order on this issue.
During hearing of a contempt of court petition, the Appellate Division on November 21 summoned the IG of prisons and home secretary directing them to appear before it today and place their explanations for not complying with its directives.
Petitioners' lawyer Ibrahim Khalil said the Appellate Division, in a verdict on April 7 last year, directed the authorities concerned to promote six prisons officials to the posts of senior jail superintendent under the Recruitment Rules of 1984.
The six officials are Md Gias Uddin Bhuiyan, Iqbal Kabir Chowdhury, Md Anwaruzzaman, Munir Ahmed, Md Bazlur Rashid Akanda and Nurunnabi Bhuiyan.
As the authorities did not promote the six in line with the SC directive, all of them, except Anwaruzzaman, filed separate contempt of court petitions with this court against the IG prisons and the home secretary.
On November 6, the Appellate Division gave them two weeks' time to implement its directives.
The IG prisons and home secretary on November 21 submitted a compliance report through lawyer Shafiqul Islam to the Appellate Division, saying that there is no scope for giving promotion to the six officials, lawyer Ibrahim Khalil said, adding that it was contempt of court.