KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Thursday issued notices to respondents on a petition filed by the Institute of Business Administration (IBA) challenging an order of the provincial ombudsman for protection against harassment of women at workplaces.

The SHC also directed that a compensation amount and an apology letter must not be handed over to a former female lecturer of IBA until the petition is decided.

Citing the ombudsman and former lecturer Zahra Sabri as respondents, the IBA and its executive director submitted that Ms Sabri had filed a complaint in January 2023 against the university’s registrar for allegedly making inappropriate and unprofessional remarks. Following an inquiry, the anti-harassment committee had recommended that IBA pay her Rs300,000 in compensation and issue a written apology.

The petitioners argued that the executive director/competent authority of IBA had declined to implement the committee’s recommendations, after which the complainant filed an appeal with the ombudsman.

On June 13, the ombudsman accepted the appeal and directed IBA to appoint a new competent authority and implement the committee’s recommendations within a week.

Representing the petitioner, senior counsel Faisal Siddiqui informed a two-judge bench headed by Justice Mohammad Iqbal Kalhoro that former judge of apex court Justice (retd) Arif Khilji has been appointed as competent authority for this case.

He further stated that IBA was ready to implement the recommendations and had submitted a cheque of Rs300,000 along with an apology letter. However, he contended that since the petition raised questions about the interpretation of certain provisions of the Protection Against Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2021, the competent authority should be restrained from disbursing the amount or handing over the apology letter until the case is decided.

After a preliminary hearing, the bench issued notices to the respondents and the Advocate General Sindh for August 21.

“Meanwhile the cheque of Rs300,000 and written apology submitted by the petitioners shall not be disbursed and written apology letter shall not be handed over to respondent No.2 till decision of this petition,” the bench in its order concluded.

The petitioners further submitted that, according to the ombudsman’s impugned order, the executive director could not serve as a witness in the inquiry proceedings. Since the executive director had testified as a witness, they argued, he lost his legal standing as the competent authority in the matter.

They also submitted that the ombudsman had not made any observations or findings on the merits of the competent authority’s decision or on the legality of the inquiry committee’s recommendations.

The petitioners maintained that the inquiry committee’s findings were subject to review by the competent authority, who was mandated under the law to independently evaluate the recommendations.

They further argued that the ombudsman failed to note that the committee had exceeded its mandate. Ms Sabri’s complaint, they said, concerned alleged inappropriate remarks by the registrar, yet the committee also made recommendations regarding alleged gender-based discrimination, which was not part of the original complaint.

Published in Dawn, June 27th, 2025