Mahbubul Anam and Ors. Vs. Ministry of Land

Relevant Citation: Civil Review Petition Nos. 305-306, 315-316, 320 of 2015 and C.P. No. 2367 of 2010; 72 DLR(AD) (2020) 239

The main issue of the dispute was regarding a memo dated issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Cox's Bazar cancelling long term leases of lands in Hotel/Motel Zone of Cox's Bazar. A writ petition was filed against the memo

The writ-petitioners were granted a long-term lease of various quanta of land in the Hotel/Motel Zone of Cox's Bazar by the proper authority for the purpose of constructing 1-5 star hotels and motels. They paid the entire consideration money in installments and were handed over possession of the lands and they have also mutated those lands in their respective names. As per terms of the lease deed, the writ-petitioners started construction work also in their leasehold land after obtaining clearance from various authorities and invested big amounts of money for construction. But all of a sudden, the Deputy Commissioner, Cox's Bazar, without serving any show-cause notice, issued a memo canceling the permanent lease of the said plots in favour of the writ-petitioners directing the writ-petitioners to hand over possession of those plots in favour of the Government. The writ-respondent argued that the construction of Hotel/Motel in that area is totally illegal, as the Government issued a Gazette Notification on 19.04.1999 declaring the area in question as Ecologically Critical Area (ECA) and also prohibiting any change of the nature of the land and water of that area, in order to protect the environment and the ecosystem of the largest sea beach area of Cox's Bazar and construction of such Hotel/Motel will frustrate the purpose of that Gazette Notification. The High Court Division, after hearing the parties and considering the materials on record, discharged the Rules Nisi giving directions, one of which was to return the lease money to the lessees. The civil petitions for leave to appeal by the writ-petitioners were further dismissed by the Appellate Division. The petitioners then filed the instant civil review petitions.

Although initially the leases/allotments were canceled due to breach in terms and conditions of the lease, and the respondents in their affidavits-in-opposition substantiated their action in canceling the leases by pointing to the alleged breaches, the submissions of the Attorney General before the High Court Division emphasized on the preservation of ecological balance in the environment and protection of natural resources. Thus, the case concerned the protection of natural resources for the benefit of the public, rather than mere breaches of the lease. The Attorney General even submitted that the Government’s grant of leases was made without taking notice of the Notification dated 19.04.1999 declaring the Cox's Bazar Sea Beach as Ecologically Critical Area under section 5 of the Bangladesh Environment Conservation Act 1995. The court noted that Cox's Bazar to Teknaf, the longest natural sand beach in the world, is a bounty bestowed upon by the Almighty Creator. And thus, it is incumbent to protect and preserve this national asset which brings benefits for the economy and also to leave a heritage for future generations. The court was of the opinion that there was no ambiguity regarding the Notification that it included the disputed area in the ECA and that such was done to protect the natural and ecological balance of the areas in question. The court further stated that they hope that the Government will adhere to the policy of preservation of the ecological balance and protection of the natural resources of the country not only for the future generations but also to ensure the protection of the environment from degradation and the harmful effects of climate change.

Therefore, the court directed that all leases granted within the area under dispute after 19.04.1999 be canceled in the same way as those of the writ-petitioners and any constructions made thereon be demolished and compensation be paid to the leaseholders for such losses. The court further directed that no lease shall be further granted within any area which has been classified as an ecologically critical area.