ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has served notices to respondents on a petition challenging restoration of Zia Batol as chairperson Pakistan Educational Institutions Regulatory Authority (PEIRA).
A division bench comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Saman Raffat Imtiaz heard the miscellaneous petition regarding the matter.
Earlier, the division bench had ordered to remove PEIRA’s chairperson from the post which was later suspended by the two-judge bench.
However, the petitioner Imtiaz Ali Qureshi had filed miscellaneous application to the court requesting it to withdraw its order for restoring Zia Batol as chairperson PEIRA.
In May this year, hearing the petition challenging appointment of the Jinnah Sindh Medical University (JSMU)’s vice chancellor without merit, the Sindh High Court (SHC) Justice Kausar Sultana Hussain had issued notices to the Sindh government authorities including the chief secretary, secretary of the boards and universities department, JSMU VC and other defendants as well as advocates general.
[embedpost slug=”appointment-of-jsmu-vc-justice-kausar-sultana-issues-notices-to-sindh-govt-authorities/”]
A date for hearing those who had been issued notices was decided to be fixed later.
Prof Dr Lubna Ansari Baig, through her counsel Haider Waheed, had pleaded to the SHC to suspend appointment of Prof Dr Amajd Siraj Memon as the vice chancellor and reinstate Prof Dr Shahid Rasool as the acting VC till the case was settled.
Lubna Baig had apprised the high court that she was a professor at the JSMU and one of the shortlisted candidates eligible for appointment of the varsity’s VC.
Presenting a copy of the merit list, she had said she had been shortlisted by the search committee along with two other candidates and her marks (70) were the highest among them followed by Dr Amjad Memon’s 67.25 marks and Prof Dr Khaja H. Mujtaba’s 48.75 marks.
The counsel Haider Waheed had said Dr Memon was appointed as the vice chancellor through a notification on March 24 for four years. He had said the appointment violated a ruling of the Supreme Court which had stated that the person with the highest marks should be appointed unless the chief minister provided a valid reason against his/ her appointment and the reason would be open to judicial scrutiny and review.
