HC: Forced resignation has no legal validity

The High Court has ruled that a resignation letter obtained from a teacher under force or coercion has no legal validity and cannot be used to terminate his employment.

In a significant judgment, the court directed the immediate reinstatement of a school headteacher, who was allegedly forced to sign a resignation letter. It also warned that failure to comply with the order could result in punitive measures, including dissolution of the school’s managing committee, removal of its chairman and suspension of the acting headteacher’s Monthly Pay Order (MPO).

The judgment was delivered in the case of Md Alkas Uddin Ahmed vs the State by a High Court bench comprising Justice Md Iqbal Kabir and Justice SM Saiful Islam. 

The bench disposed of the rule on August 20.

The full text of the judgment was published recently. Justice Md Iqbal Kabir authored the main judgment. 

The case concerns Md Alkas Uddin Ahmed, headteacher of Golam Nabi Model Pilot High School in Kaliakair, Gazipur. Alkas Uddin challenged the legality of his forced resignation after alleging that a group of individuals compelled him to sign a resignation letter against his will on August 14, 2024.

He subsequently filed a general diary with Kaliakair Police Station the following day. He also submitted written complaints to the district secondary education officer and the upazila nirbahi officer, and later approached the director general of the Directorate of Secondary and Higher Education and the chairman of the Dhaka Education Board, seeking legal remedies and intervention.

Following an investigation, the Dhaka Education Board directed that Ahmed be reinstated to his post. However, as the order was not properly implemented, he filed a writ petition with the High Court in 2024.

The High Court initially issued a rule and stayed the effectiveness of the resignation letter for three months. After the final hearing, the court disposed of the rule on August 20 and ordered his reinstatement.

In its judgment, the court observed that Ahmed’s resignation was neither voluntary nor submitted of his own free will. Rather, his signature had been obtained through force, and such a resignation had no legal validity.

“Law and regulations do not support resignation obtained through force or coercion,” the court said.

The court further noted that Ahmed continued to receive his MPO salary and allowances until July 2025. In such circumstances, the school’s managing committee was legally bound to retain him in his position as headteacher, and he was entitled to immediate reinstatement.

The High Court also held that the education board, as the superior authority, has the power to review, approve, modify or cancel disciplinary measures proposed by a school’s managing committee.

According to the judgment, the instructions issued by the education board to the managing committee chairman and the headteacher were binding. Deliberately ignoring those instructions amounted to misconduct, arbitrariness and abuse of power, the court observed.

The court said such conduct was also contrary to the principles of natural justice, administrative discipline and equality.

It further held that the respondents were under a statutory and legal obligation to implement the education board’s directives and that their inaction, administrative negligence and failure to perform their statutory duties violated the petitioner’s lawful rights.

The court therefore directed the concerned authorities to ensure Ahmed’s reinstatement to his post through the school’s managing committee.

Lawyers Md Zohurul Islam Mukul and Manabendra Roy represented Ahmed, while SM Rezaul Islam appeared for the chairman of the school’s managing committee.