The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh has ordered the reinstatement of 988 officials and employees of the National University (NU) who were dismissed in 2012. A seven-member bench led by Chief Justice Syed Refaat Ahmed , on 28 May 2025,delivered the ruling, marks a significant turn in a long-standing legal and administrative conflict involving employment practices during two successive governments.
These individuals were originally appointed to various positions ranging from MLSS (office assistants) to deputy registrars during the period between 17 November 2003 and 31 August 2004. The appointments took place under the 4-party Alliance government. However, a series of legal challenges and judicial interventions later led to their dismissal during the Awami League government in 2012.
The legal battle began when former National University senate member and parliamentarian Fazle Rabbi Mia filed a writ petition in the High Court questioning the legality of the appointments. Following a hearing, the High Court rescinds the rule on 22 August 2006. However, in a significant development, another petition was filed by AKM Mozammel Haque, then lawmaker from Gazipur-1, seeking a review of the decision. This prompted a different bench of the High Court to issue a fresh verdict on 23 August 2011, directing the authorities to terminate the 988 employees.
In response, the affected employees sought leave to appeal against the 2011 High Court order. On 1 December 2011, the Appellate Division nullified both previous High Court rulings and instructed a rehearing of the matter. After the re-hearing, on 20 February 2012, the High Court issued another verdict that upheld the original rule and deemed the appointments illegal. Citing that the appointments were based on advertisements in several newspapers in 2004 but violated procedural and legal standards, the court ordered the dismissal of all 988 staff. The National University promptly followed through with this directive, formally dismissing the employees in April 2012.
The dismissed employees again filed a leave to appeal, leading to another hearing in the Appellate Division. On 19 May 2016, the court disposed of the appeal with observations, effectively sustaining the 2012 High Court judgment and solidifying the dismissals.
After years of litigation and administrative uncertainty, the National University opted to revisit the matter. On 4 September 2024, the university filed a review petition challenging the Appellate Division’s 2016 verdict. The court granted leave to appeal on 1 December 2024, which opened the door for a fresh legal challenge to the earlier rulings. The formal appeal was submitted earlier in 2025, culminating in the verdict issued on 28 May.
The ruling marks a complete reversal of the court’s previous position. The Appellate Division overturned its 2016 decision, quashed the 2012 High Court verdict, and ordered the reinstatement of all affected employees. The decision is not only a significant legal precedent but also a major administrative development, especially given the number of individuals affected and the protracted nature of the dispute.
With this ruling, the 988 officials and employees are to be reinstated in their respective positions. The court also directed that the period between their dismissal in 2012 and reinstatement in 2025 be treated as extraordinary leave. This decision ensures that the reinstated personnel will not lose their seniority as a result of the dismissal. The court has authorized the National University to determine other entitlements and benefits, considering the prolonged suffering and socio-economic impact faced by the dismissed staff over the past 13 years.
This case has drawn attention due to its political, legal, and administrative implications. It reflects the deep entanglement of recruitment policies and judicial scrutiny in public sector employment, especially during transitions between governments. The back-and-forth decisions between different benches of the High Court and the Appellate Division illustrate the complex dynamics of legal interpretation, particularly in cases involving mass recruitment during politically sensitive periods.
The verdict also sets a critical precedent for how judicial decisions can evolve in response to review petitions and new arguments, especially when human impact and administrative fairness are brought into sharper focus. It reinforces the role of the Supreme Court as the ultimate arbiter in safeguarding not only the legality but also the equity of public service decisions.
The reinstatement is expected to be a major logistical and administrative challenge for the National University, requiring careful coordination to reintegrate hundreds of employees after more than a decade. Nonetheless, the verdict brings long-awaited relief and justice to the affected individuals and underscores the judiciary’s capacity for self-correction in the pursuit of fairness and legality.
