Supreme Court Judgments, Summarised

by Barrister Tahmidur Rahman | Nov 3, 2026

Summary

Two proprietors applied for permission to establish filling stations in Tangail and Cox's Bazar. By memos dated 12.01.2025 and 04.06.2025 the Power and Mineral Resources Division directed that their applications be kept with the record until new guidelines on filling stations and dealer appointments were published. The petitioners challenged the memos under Article 102. The Bangladesh Petroleum Corporation argued that the first petitioner's provisional approval rested on clause 7 (uma), repealed in 2018, and that the second had no Board approval. The Court found that the first petitioner's ground of approval had been repealed and that the second lacked the marketing company Board approval which is a condition precedent, so neither was entitled to a direction to grant permission. However, the mere intention to frame new guidelines could not justify keeping the applications pending indefinitely while the 2014 Guidelines remained in force. The memos were declared without lawful authority and the respondents were directed to decide the applications under the existing Guidelines within 60 days.

Issues

  1. Q1

    Whether the Ministry could lawfully direct that applications for permission to set up filling stations be kept pending until new guidelines are published, while the 2014 Guidelines remained in force.

  2. Q2

    Whether the petitioners were entitled to a direction to grant them permission to set up their filling stations.

Key points

  • The mere intention to frame a new guideline cannot, without lawful suspension or repeal of the existing guideline, justify keeping applications pending indefinitely.
  • Unless the existing Guidelines have been repealed, suspended or rendered inapplicable, the competent authority must discharge its obligation under them and dispose of applications in accordance with law.
  • Applicants are entitled to have their applications considered under the Guidelines in force, but have no absolute right to permission merely because they applied under them.
  • Without the marketing company Board's approval, the Bangladesh Petroleum Corporation is under no lawful obligation to grant permission to establish a filling station.
  • Approvals granted to others do not by themselves entitle the petitioners to a direction in their favour.
  • The memos dated 12.01.2025 and 04.06.2025 were declared without lawful authority, and the respondents were directed to dispose of the applications under the 2014 Guidelines within 60 days.

The authority cannot keep the applications in abeyance indefinitely on the ground that new guidelines are likely to come into force at some future uncertain date.

From the judgment, Justice Urmee Rahman
Law considered

Constitution of the People's Republic of Bangladesh, Article 102Notun Filling Station Sthapon/Service Station Sthapon Songkranto Nitimala-2014 (Amended-2018)Guidelines of 2014, clause 7 (uma)

The judgment

In the court’s own words.

Writ Petition 16207/2025, as published by the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. 1 page, with paragraph numbers for citing.

This judgment is set in the court’s original typeface. Read it page by page on trw.co.

Read the judgment →

Call the Dhaka office+880 1708 000660WhatsApp · message usMessage our team
Message TRW on WhatsApp