High Court Division · Special Original Jurisdiction
Md. Bahadur Uddin Ahmed v Government of Bangladesh and others
Writ Petition 27/2025 · Rule discharged as infructuous · Decided 3 September 2026
The petitioner brought a writ petition under article 102 of the Constitution challenging an auction notice published in the daily Samakal and the daily Janadesh on 11.12.2024, purportedly under section 12(3) of the Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003, for the sale of the scheduled mortgaged property by auction on 13.01.2025. The High Court Division issued a Rule Nisi together with an interim order staying the operation of the auction notice. At the hearing, the advocate for respondent No. 2 submitted that the property could not be sold because of the stay, that the scheduled auction date had expired in the meantime, and that the auction notice had therefore lost its effectiveness, making the Rule infructuous. Considering the facts and circumstances, the Court accepted that the Rule had become infructuous and discharged it on that ground, without any order as to costs. The order of stay granted when the Rule was issued was recalled.
- Whether a Rule challenging an auction notice under section 12(3) of the Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003 survives once the scheduled auction date has passed while the auction was stayed.
- Where an auction could not be held because of the Court's stay and the scheduled auction date has expired, the auction notice under section 12(3) of the Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003 loses its effectiveness.
- A Rule challenging such an expired auction notice becomes infructuous and is to be discharged on that ground.
- On discharge of the Rule, the interim order of stay granted at the time of its issuance is recalled.
- No order as to costs was made.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Rule is discharged as being infructuous.
