IHC upholds order for suspension of PEMRA DG

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has directed a federal ombudsman to “give proper hearing” to both parties – a Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) former female employee and a senior Pemra officer – in a harassment case and to pass a “speaking order” in 15 days.

An IHC single bench, comprising Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, issued an 8-page order on a petition filed by Pemra Director General HR and Administration Haji Adam against his ‘illegal” suspension from service on complaint of another Pemra official.

Federal Ombudsman for Protection against Harassment of Women at Workplace Kashmala Tariq on Feb 4 suspended the service of Haji Adam to prevent him from influencing an ongoing departmental inquiry while hearing a complaint filed against him by a former Pemra employee.

Pemra had later moved the President Secretariat against the ombudsman’s decision on its own but the secretariat on June 30 refused to undo the suspension order. Pemra chairman on July 3 also maintained the suspension order. Adam moved the IHC against all these orders.

He contended that the ex-employee registered a complaint with the ombudsman while a 7-member Pemra committee was still investigating her complaint against him on departmental basis.

Haji Adam also contended that the federal ombudsman on February 4 passed the order in his absence as he was out of the country when the hearing took place.

The IHC, however, disposed of his petition while maintaining the orders for his suspension. It asked the ombudsman to “give proper hearing” to both parties and to pass a “speaking order” in 15 days.

The court noted that while the petitioner contended that the ombudsman’s decision had no legal worth, he had filed a request with her for a review of ombudsman’s February 4 order.

“[This] makes the instant constitutional [petition] not maintainable as the alternate remedy has been availed; although the petitioner has taken the stance that he has filed application for withdrawal of the pending review petition.

“While considering all these legal and factual aspects, there is no cavil to the proposition that the federal ombudsman can only pass the order provided under the law, ie, Section 10 of the Act 2010 which deals with the powers of the ombudsman,” the order read.

The court added that February 4 order of ombudsman “shall remain in field till the next order of the ombudsman within 15 days."