The High Court has ruled that a resignation letter obtained coercively from a teacher has no legal validity. Concurrently, the court has directed the immediate reinstatement of the teacher whose signature was forcibly obtained on the resignation letter.
The High Court bench, comprising Justice Md. Iqbal Kabir and Justice S. M. Saiful Islam, delivered this verdict on August 20, resolving the rule in the case titled ‘Md. Alkas Uddin Ahmed vs. State’. The full text of the judgment was recently published.
In its verdict, the court stated that the petitioner’s resignation letter was not submitted voluntarily or by his own will; rather, his signature was obtained by force. Such a resignation has no legal validity. No law or regulation supports a resignation obtained under coercion or pressure.
According to the case details, Md. Alkas Uddin Ahmed, the headmaster of Golam Nabi Model Pilot High School in Kaliakoir Upazila, Gazipur, alleged that on August 14, 2024, a group of individuals forcibly made him sign a resignation letter against his will. The following day, he filed a general diary (GD) at Kaliakoir Police Station regarding the incident.
Subsequently, Alkas Uddin informed the District Secondary Education Officer, Upazila Nirbahi Officer, Director General of the Directorate of Secondary and Higher Education, and the Chairman of the Dhaka Education Board in writing about the matter. He also sought legal remedy.
Based on the report of the investigation committee formed for the incident, the Dhaka Education Board directed the reinstatement of Alkas Uddin Ahmed to his position. However, as the directive was not properly implemented, he filed a writ petition with the High Court in 2024.
After the preliminary hearing of the writ petition, the High Court issued a rule and simultaneously suspended the effectiveness of the forcibly obtained resignation letter for three months. Subsequently, on August 20 of this year, the court resolved the rule and delivered its final verdict.
In its judgment, the High Court stated that the petitioner’s resignation had no legal validity. He had been receiving salary and allowances as part of MPO (Monthly Payment Order) until July 2025. Consequently, the school’s governing body is legally bound to allow him to continue serving as headmaster and retain him in service.
The court further stated that the non-implementation of the Education Board’s directive amounts to misconduct, arbitrariness, and abuse of power. Such conduct is contrary to the principles of justice, administrative discipline, and equality. The concerned parties are legally obligated to implement the Education Board’s directive.
As per the High Court’s directive, all necessary steps must be taken to reinstate Alkas Uddin Ahmed to his position. The judgment also stated that punitive measures would be taken against those concerned if they fail to implement the directive.
These measures include recommendations such as the cancellation of the school’s governing body, the removal of its chairman, and the suspension of MPO for the acting headmaster, who also serves as the member-secretary of the governing body.
