Full verdict of new Warrant of Precedence released

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court on Thursday released the full text of its verdict on Warrant of Precedence, giving district judges the status of government secretaries. The SC pronounced the judgement on January 11, 2015.
Constitutional post holders will be given priority in the new Warrant of Precedence, the apex court ruled in its 62-page full judgment signed by a five-member Appellate Division panel headed by then Chief Justice Md Muzammel Hossain.
The Supreme Court verdict reads: "1) As the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, all holding constitutional positions shall be placed in first order of priority in the Table of impugned Warrant of Precedence.
2) Members of judicial service holding the posts of District Judges or equivalent positions shall be placed at Serial No. 16 in the Table along with the Secretaries to the Government and equivalent public servants on the service of the Republic.
3) Additional District Judges or holder of equivalent judicial posts shall be placed at serial number 17 immediately after the District Judges."
The court also said, "It is expected that those dignitaries who have  been  honoured  or  decorated  with  civil  awards like  Shadhinata Padak, or Ekhushey Padak, and those valiant freedom fighters who have been honoured with galantry awards of Bir Uttam should be included in the  Table  of  the  impugned  Warrant  of  Precedence  in such  order  as deemed appropriate."  
The government on September 11, 1986, published the Warrant of Precedence issuing a gazette notification. It was amended in 2000.
Then secretary general of Bangladesh Judicial Service Association Md Ataur Rahman lodged a writ petition with the High Court on 2006, challenging the legality of that Warrant of Precedence.
The High Court on February 4, 2010, pronounced its verdict on that writ, declaring that Warrant of Precedence void and gave eight instructions to the government.
The government later filed an appeal against the verdict. The Appellate Division in its judgement disposed of that appeal with "expunction, modification, observations and findings as stated above."