High Court Questions Legality of BTRC Promotions Amid Controversial Appointments
The High Court has issued a rule regarding the promotion process of 29 officials in the revenue sector of the Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC), after questions were raised about the legality of their controversial appointments. Instead of directing legal action against them, the court has sought explanations over the promotion process.
The High Court bench comprising Justice Rajik-Al-Jalil and Justice Md. Anwarul Islam issued the rule on Monday, March 9, after hearing a writ petition.
In the rule, the court directed the Secretary of the Post and Telecommunications Division, the Chairman of BTRC, the Director General of the Administration Division, and the Joint Secretary of the Audit Wing to respond within two weeks.
The court asked why no legal action had been taken against the 29 officials despite repeated directives from the ministry, and why such inaction should not be declared unlawful. It also sought an explanation as to why the proceedings of the DDP meeting held on November 3—called to facilitate the promotion of the officials despite audit objections and evidence of Serious Financial Irregularities (SFI)—should not be declared beyond legal authority and therefore illegal.
Earlier, on Sunday, March 8, six Deputy Directors of BTRC had filed the writ petition.
According to case documents and allegations, the 29 officials were absorbed into the revenue sector between the fiscal years 2006–07 and 2019–20 in violation of BTRC’s own recruitment regulations. Although several audit reports highlighted serious financial irregularities and age discrepancies related to these appointments, BTRC authorities reportedly remained silent for unexplained reasons. Even the white paper prepared by the taskforce formed under the interim government directly identified these appointments as “illegal.”
Following the court’s order, Barrister Shihab Uddin Khan, lawyer for the petitioners, said that attempting to promote individuals whose recruitment process had already been declared illegal by the Audit Directorate demonstrates administrative disorder. He noted that the controversial attempt to promote the officials through the DDP meeting held on November 3 was essentially what the court has now challenged, addressing both administrative inaction and unlawful activities.
He further remarked that such practices, which deprive qualified officials within the organization, highlight long-standing administrative opacity.
He added that when irregularities were identified in government audits during the fiscal years 2016–17 and 2019–20, the details of the audit objections were formally communicated on December 13, 2020. Although explanations were sought from the BTRC Chairman regarding the irregular recruitment, the matter was reportedly delayed, and the explanation was not provided. Subsequently, on October 16, the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications issued a letter instructing BTRC to take action.
The white paper prepared by the taskforce formed during the interim government also provided detailed descriptions of the irregularities in the appointments of the 29 officials. Later, on December 14, 2025, the ministry directed BTRC to take legal action against those involved. However, for unknown reasons, instead of taking action, a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) was formed to facilitate their promotions. Despite objections from the DPC, meeting dates were repeatedly changed while efforts to advance the promotion process continued.
In this situation, six Deputy Directors filed the writ petition, and after the hearing concluded today, the High Court issued the rule.
DBTech/MAR/IH/OR
