National Database and Registration Authority Chairman Tariq Malik. PHOTO: ZAFAR ASLAM
The court had reserved its decision on December 11 prior to Malik's resignation.
IHC judge, Justice Noorul Haq N Qureshi announced the decision today.
In a surprise move, the government had removed Malik on the night of December 3 and appointed a new chairman within hours. However, the IHC had reinstated him on interim basis the next morning and suspended his termination orders.
"After coming back from vacations I learnt there have been a lot of changes," Justice Qureshi stated, referring to Malik's resignation.
Malik had resigned from his post on January 10 citing personal reasons.
Allegations
On December 31, after initiating a formal inquiry, the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) had summoned the NADRA chairman to file his reply about the irregularities discovered within NADRA but Malik did not appear before the inquiry committee.
The Nadra chairman had written in a letter to the Federal Interior Secretary rejecting allegations levelled against him by Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan.
Interior ministry, in the last week of December, had issued a four-page show-cause notice to Malik, levelling against him charges of concealing the facts, misuse of official powers and financial irregularities.
Malik had said the issue of his sacking was being heard in the Islamabad High Court, but the interior minister chose to level “baseless allegations” at a press conference.
Saga
The chairman’s sacking had come only days after an election tribunal asked NADRA to verify the thumb impressions of voters from the Lahore constituency NA-118, won by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz candidate Malik Riaz.
On December 12, Malik had insisted that no rules were violated upon his assumption of office, dismissing a government claim that his appointment was illegal.
He had also clarified that his appointment as member (of the authority) was not a promotion nor did it involve or entail any financial consequences since he did not draw any remuneration.
The Supreme Court had directed IHC on December 10 to settle the case in a month. Forwarding the government’s request challenging the reinstatement, the apex court had also ordered the IHC to make a decision regarding its stay order in 15 days.
COMMENTS (13)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1724152318-0/beyonce-(1)1724152318-0-165x106.webp "article")
1728213758-0/Tribune-Pic-(2)1728213758-0-165x106.webp "article")
I request our honorary judiciary, as a common citizen, to don't loose the honour bestowed in you. No one can dishonor the judiciary if they work hard to keep it. We trust the person who first learn trust himself. Wrong action is as bad as no-action when it's due. Thanks, Goodluck!
Classic example of "Justice delayed is justice denied"
Classic example of "Justice delayed is justice denied" this is our judicial system
Its more than apparent from all the decisions of judiciary that its impartiality can not be guaranteed under the present system. Poor people will have to learn that we are slaves and slaves don't have any rights unless the shackles are broken by the people for the people
Justice delayed is justice denied!
Judicial activism that PPP used to moan when it was in the Government!
The post will be filled by Mr Fakhruddin G Ibrahim for his services in the recent past.
Laugh Out Loud - mockery of justice at its peak!
If courts are impartial, then advise government to reinstate him again.
What a nonsense is this? The judge has been waiting for resignation to announce this decision. It looks as the government is in full control of the judges as well.