PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court on Friday issued a notice to the provincial higher education department seeking its response to the plea of the vice-chancellor of the Women’s University Swabi against the 90 days extension of her forced leave by the provincial governor and chancellor.

A bench consisting of Justice Syed M Attique Shah and Justice Sahibzada Asadullah issued the order after hearing preliminary arguments of the counsel for VC Prof Shahana Urooj Kazmi in favour of the suspension of the department’s Aug 20 order for forced leave extension.

The main petition of Prof Shahana against an inquiry conducted by the Governor’s Inspection Team (GIT) against her and a notification for sending her on forced leave on May 25, 2021, is already pending with the high court.

The petition is filed through lawyers Syed Akhtar Ali Shah and Daniyal Asad Chankani stating that there was no jurisdiction vested in the Governor’s Inspection Team (GIT) under the KP Universities Act, 2012, to undertake any inquiry into the affairs of any of the university.

Prof Shahana of Swabi varsity seeks suspension of order

The petitioner’s lawyers said their client was appointed the WUS vice-chancellor in Mar 2020 for three years and after assuming the office, she began managing the affairs of the university in an objective manner with a focus on improving overall governance to enhance the quality of education.

They said the petitioner had terminated a few non-performing staff members, including those not recruited in accordance with the law, but the move wasn’t liked by vested interest, which began a vilification campaign against her.

The counsel said those elements started sending letters against her to the provincial governor, speaker of the assembly, and other functionaries with baseless and unfounded allegations against her.

They added that on Mar 24, 2021, the petitioner received a letter from the GIT secretary revealing that the governor, presumably acting as the chancellor, had decided to send the GIT for inquiry.

The counsel insisted that the letter in question was devoid of any terms of reference of that inquiry.

They said in May, the petitioner came to know through media reports that the JIT had found that the petitioner had committed serious irregularities and illegalities in appointments by the petitioner and that she had been ordered to go on forced leave.

The lawyers said the main petition had raised substantial questions of the law, including the legal status of the GIT within the ambit of the University Act, 2012, non-observance of due process of the law, and the arbitrary exercise of authority.

They added that while that petition was sub judice, the impugned notification was issued on May 25 sending the petitioner on forced leave for 90 days.

The counsel contended that the court asked the department on May 27 not to issue any adverse order against the petitioner.

They added that as the period of forced leave would have been completed on Aug 23 allowing the petitioner to resume duty, the impugned notification was issued on Aug 20 extending that period for 90 days.

The lawyers contended that the extension of their client’s forced leave was contrary to the law and arbitrary exercise of powers by the government functionaries.

Published in Dawn, August 28th, 2021