LHC orders comprehensive probe into 228 appointments at Agricultural University Faisalabad

The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday ordered a comprehensive inquiry into the recruitment of 228 employees and professors in grades 1 to 22 at the University of Agriculture Faisalabad (UAF), directing the university’s Syndicate to examine the legality, merit and transparency of all the appointments.

LAHORE, Sep 28 (APP): The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday ordered a comprehensive inquiry into the recruitment of 228 employees and professors in grades 1 to 22 at the University of Agriculture Faisalabad (UAF), directing the university’s Syndicate to examine the legality, merit and transparency of all the appointments.
Justice Khalid Ishaq issued orders while hearing petitions filed by Professor Ehsan Qadir Bhaba and others.
As per the court’s order, the Syndicate would review appointments ranging from Grade 1 employees to Grade 22 officers and professors. The inquiry would examine the legal status of the appointments, merit, transparency and all other relevant aspects
of the recruitment process.
The court directed that all 228 appointees must be given a full opportunity to present their cases and be heard during the inquiry before any decision is taken.
Counsel for the petitioners had told the court that 228 people, ranging from lower-grade employees to professors, had allegedly been recruited through illegal and non-transparent procedures at the university.
The counsel submitted that the former UAF Vice Chancellor Dr Iqrar Ahmad Khan allegedly issued notifications for the appointments late at night on the day of his retirement.
The counsel further submitted that the Punjab governor, in his capacity as Chancellor, had also directed the university’s Syndicate to investigate the alleged irregular appointments.
He alleged that some of the individuals appointed through the disputed process had created hurdles in the Syndicate’s inquiry and attempted to avoid proceedings by relying on court stay orders.
The counsel argued that public appointments could not legally be made through unlawful or non-transparent procedures and that the legality, merit and procedure followed in all 228 appointments therefore required scrutiny.
What to read next...