SHC dismisses contempt plea against governor, principal secy

The Sindh High Court dismissed a contempt of court application on Monday against the governor and his principal secretary in a case relating to the appointment of the vice-chancellor of the Dow University of Health Sciences (DUHS).

Dr Masood Hameed, a former vice chancellor of the varsity, had filed the contempt of court application against Governor Mohammad Zubair and the latter’s principal secretary, Mohammad Sualeh Ahmed Farooqui, for disobeying a court order in the DUHS VC appointment case.

His counsel submitted that the SHC in its April 26, 2016 order had directed a search committee to complete the process of the vice chancellor’s posting within 20 days, and till then Dr Hameed would continue to work as vice chancellor.

He alleged that instead of making the appointment on a regular basis, the governor had made Professor Dr Khawar Jamali, pro-VC of the university, as acting vice chancellor in disregard of the court’s directives. He pleaded that contempt of the court proceedings be initiated against the governor and his principal secretary.

DUHS and federal law officers opposed the application and submitted that Dr Jamali’s appointment as Acting vice chancellor was made in accordance with the law and the high court judgment, and requested the court to dismiss the plea. 

The federal law officer submitted that the governor was out of the province and a notification of the VC’s appointment would be issued in compliance with the court directives soon after his return from Islamabad.

A division bench, headed by Justice Mohammad Iqbal Kalhoro, after hearing arguments of the counsel, dismissed the application for reason to be recorded later.

Pak-Turk schools 

The Sindh High Court directed the federal government to submit policy regarding the deportation of staff of the Pak-Turk Foundation schools.

The court was hearing a petition against the federal government’s decision to deport staffers of Pak-Turk schools.  Petitioners, including parents, students and teachers of the schools, had filed the petition challenging the deportation decision following a request of the Turkish government.

The interior ministry ordered the Turkish staff of the educational network to leave Pakistan, rejecting their applications for extension of staffers’ visas.  The petitioners’ counsel, Abdul Hameed Khoso, said that the Pak-Turk Foundation was a non-profit non-governmental organisation, which had nothing to do with the politics of Pakistan or Turkey. He said the deportation order would hurt the interests of 11,000 students of the schools.

Khoso submitted that Turkish teachers had applied for extensions of their visas, but the government had ordered the staff to leave the country. He added that Pak-Turk schools provided inexpensive but quality education and the decision to deport the teachers would harm the future of the students.

The additional attorney general told the court that there was no order for the closure of the schools, but the visas of the Turkish schools’ administration staff had not been extended because of state policy.

A division bench, headed by Justice Munib Akhtar, adjourned the matter till May 22 and directed the federal law officer to explain the state policy on the issue.  The court also continued the interim stay order suspending that the federal government’s decision to deport the Pak-Turk schools’ staffers till further orders.

Case sent to ATC

The Sindh High Court ordered the transfer of an extrajudicial killing trial against police personnel from a sessions court to an anti- terrorism court.

The directive came over an applicant, Anwar Ali, who sought the transfer of the trial against former Sachal SHO Ismail Lashari and other police personnel charged with the extrajudicial killing of Ali’s son from a sessions court to an anti-terrorism court.

According to the prosecution, former SHO Lashari and other policemen, Mukhtiar Mangi, Khalid Bhatti and Shabbir Khoso, were booked by the Sachal police for allegedly killing Anisuddin Soomro in a fake encounter in June 2014. The applicant’s counsel submitted that a case fell within the ambit of the anti-terrorism law and it be tried before an ATC.