(W.P. No: 5140/2013)

The Vested Property Act 1974 was a highly controversial law that effectively allowed the Government to appropriate property from individuals it deemed to be an enemy of the state. The abuse of laws by the government and its agencies deprived religious minorities of their land continued post independence. The Act was repealed and replaced with the Vested Properties Return Act, 2011.

In an effort to restore the confiscated property to its rightful owners, campaign groups and affected communities, however, noted significant gaps and inconsistencies in the law. The Act appeared to contradict the basic spirit of the Proclamation of Independence of Bangladesh and certain constitutional rights. Specifically, Section 26 of the Act, after the expiry of 300 days of the publication of the gazette notifications containing the final “A” and “B’’ Schedules respectively to the Act, the government was to be the owner of the property if the property is not claimed within the stipulated time after being entered into the list of returnable property. To ensure equal protection of law among citizens and their constitutional right to private ownership, the Association for Land Reform and Development (ALRD), BLAST and the other core organisations that had been involved in campaigning for the new law filed a Writ Petition being W.P No. 5140/2013 for a declaration that some provisions of the said Act are unconstitutional.

The petitioners argued that several provisions of the Vested Properties Return Act 2011 (as amended in 2011 and 2012) are ultra vires [beyond the terms] of the Constitution and in violation of fundamental rights. They further argued that the impugned provisions of the said Act are also in conflict with earlier judgments of our highest courts. The petitioners submitted that Section 26 will cause irreparable loss to the minority people as they may not be able to claim the property within the stipulated time due to various reasons. For example, there is a concern that vested interests, including government officials, may avail of this opportunity to appropriate “vested properties.”

On 5 July, 2013, a Division Bench of the High Court issued a Rule Nisi upon the respondents to show cause as to why the declaration of the Schedule of Property contained in the “Ka” Gazette under the category of 2 (Nioh) of the Vested Property Return Act 2001 (as amended up to date) should not be declared to have been made without lawful authority and be of no legal effect. There was no interim order issued. Armed with the direction of the aforesaid Writ Petition, BLAST collaborated with the Hindu Bouddho Christho Oikko Porishod [Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council], ASK and other professionals, academics and civil society organisations to campaign to amend the provision of the Vested Properties Return Act 2001. Against this backdrop, the Government was compelled to pass the Vested Properties Return Act 2001 (as amended in 2013) cancelling the Schedule ‘B”. According to the new amendment, all cases challenging the ownership of the property on the schedule-B will no longer exist and all previous judgments and decrees of the cases relating to the property of the schedule-B will be cancelled.BLAST, in collaboration with other organisations and strong networks was able to defend the rights of minorities to private property by petitioning against the new law that could potentially lead to denial of liberty as well as economic and political deprivation.