SHC throws out petition against Dr Nighat Shah’s reappointment

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court has dismissed for not being maintainable a petition challenging reappointment of a recently retired associate professor of the Jinnah Sindh Medical University (JSMU).

Petitioner Dr Memoona Rehman, an associate professor at the JSMU, moved the SHC against the Aug 5 decision of the Sindh cabinet and a subsequent letter issued by the Universities & Board Department regarding the impugned appointment of Dr Nighat Shah on Aug 10.

Her counsel Malik Naeem Iqbal submitted in the petition that his client, being a regularly appointed associate professor in the same specialty, was directly aggrieved by the impugned re-employment of Dr Shah as it affected her legitimate expectation and prospects of promotion to the post of professor.

He also stated that the reemployment / contractual appointment of Dr Shah for three years was made through a person-specific cabinet decision just a couple of days before her superannuation and the same was illegal, without lawful authority and void ab for being contrary to the JSMU Act, 2013 and the statutes framed thereunder.

Bench rules high court cannot act as appellate forum over cabinet decisions

The lawyer maintained that since the post was already advertised and a competitive selection process was underway, there was neither any exigency nor exceptional circumstance justifying such re-employment of private respondent rendering the impugned action colourable and discriminatory.

A two-judge constitutional bench headed by Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon said that it heard the petitioner’s counsel on the maintainability of the petition under Article 199 of the Constitution and perused the record with his assistance.

It noted that the constitutional jurisdiction of this court was subject to the condition that no other adequate remedy was provided by law.

The petition was brought by an aggrieved party and therefore, the petitioner must cross these two jurisdictional hurdles besides challenging the decision of cabinet being a policy matter, it added.

“Where neither condition is satisfied, this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the petition, unless the impugned order is shown to be mala fide, which is not the case in the present matter as the decision has been made by the cabinet,” it added.

The bench in its order further noted that the directions were issued for the impugned appointment pursuant to a policy decision of the provincial cabinet, which considered the matter in the larger public interest and with a view to ensuring continuity of specialised healthcare services, academic leadership, postgraduate medical education, research and institutional excellence.

“In exercise of the constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the high court does not sit as an appellate forum over the decisions of the cabinet, particularly where such decisions fall within the administrative or executive domain and are taken in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law and pursuant thereto, the universities & boards department directed the Vice-Chancellor to take necessary action for her appointment strictly in accordance with the prescribed procedure and applicable provisions of the said PM&DC Notification, which decision prima facie has not been made,” the court order reads.

The bench said, “The cabinet decision dated 05.08.2026, although founded upon stated considerations of public interest and institutional continuity, did not itself appoint respondent No 6 [Dr Shah], but directed consideration of her appointment in accordance with the prescribed procedure.

“It consequently could not dispense with the requirements of the JSMU Act, 2013,

the Statutes or the applicable recruitment framework. This assumes greater significance because the post of Professor in Gynaecology & Obstetrics and re-employment immediately upon superannuation, for a further period of three years, requires consideration by the respondent university under the law,” the bench observed.

Dismissing the petition in limine, the bench stated that PM&DC’s notification itself required that contractual engagement of retired faculty should not adversely affect the promotion prospects or career progression of serving faculty.

Published in Dawn, August 20th, 2026