KARACHI, Nov 23: The Sindh High Court has asked the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council to show cause on November 29 why it should not be prosecuted for contempt of court for not giving representation to three private medical institutions in accordance with its order of September 7.
On a writ petition moved by Ziauddin Medical University, Fatima Jinnah Dental College & Hospital Trust, and S.M. Sohail Trust, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sabihuddin Ahmed and Justice Muhammad Afzal Soomro had held that the petitioner institutions were entitled to representation on the council as they were imparting qualifications recognized by it in terms of Section 3 (f) of the PMDC Ordinance, 1962.
Under Section 3(b) of the ordinance, the PMDC, the bench observed, is to include one member each to be elected by the members of the syndicate of every Pakistani university from among the members of the medical faculty or the dental faculty of the university or, if the university has both medical and dental faculties, from among the members of the two faculties.
The council was asked to conduct polls for one representative each of the petitioner institutions as required by the provision within two months.
The bench also declared that there was no concept of provisional recognition and that once a qualification was recognized, the institution conferring it was deemed to be recognized. It, however, clarified that there would be no restraint on the PMDC functioning except to the extent that inspection of the petitioner institutions would be undertaken only after their representatives ‘have been duly elected to the council’.
The petitioner institutions submitted in their contempt petition that the PMDC has failed to comply with the court orders. Over two months have elapsed without the council holding the elections. In fact, the syndicates have already chosen their nominees to represent the institutions in the PMDC and elections were a mere formality the council had failed to fulfil.
Besides the council, its chairman and secretary and all its members have been cited as respondents in the contempt petition.
NOTICE TO PTCL: A division bench comprising Justices Ghulam Rabbani and Munib Ahmed Khan issued notices to the Pakistan Telecommunication Company and its chairman in a petition by a PTCL employee alleging that he was being harassed by the company and its officials for agitating certain irregularities in the court.
Petitioner Nasiruddin Ghauri submitted through Advocate Junaid Farooqui that his bonus had been withheld and his phone connection snapped to victimize him from exposing irregularities.
He had alleged in his previous petition that some officials of the company had floated bogus supply and maintenance firms in different names to award them contracts at the company’s expense and enrich themselves at its cost.
The notices were issued for a date in office.
DCO CALLED: In a petition moved by an outdoor advertiser, Justice Mushir Alam asked the district coordination officer of the city district government to appear in person. The petitioner claimed that he acquired advertising rights to display a hoarding at ‘Playland’ in Clifton on payment of Rs6 million. He was rented out the site for three years and duly paid the rent for 2005. However, he was not being allowed to put up the hoarding.
