PESHAWAR: A local court has decreed a damages law suit in favour of a senior journalist of Peshawar against a digital news company, ordering it to pay him damages to the tune of Rs20 million.
The additional district judge, Mohammad Khan Yousafzai, ordered that damages to the tune of Rs10 million should be paid to plaintiff Ghulam Dastagir for contractual violation by the company and Rs10 million for levelling baseless allegations against him and causing him mental distress.
The journalist, Ghulam Dastagir, had sought damages from the defendant to the tune of Rs10 million for the alleged violation of contract between him and the company, Saar Digital, which runs Loksujag.Com, of July 1, 2022, and Rs90 million for levelling baseless allegations, while terminating his employment contract, which caused agony, fatigue and mental torture and stress to him.
The plaintiff stated that he had suffered mental trauma and had to seek medical attention to overcome it which still continued.
The chief executive of the company, Syed Tahir Mehdi, when contacted, said that he would challenge the order in high court as they had a very strong case. He said that the trial court had not heard their counsel and their right to cross examine the plaintiff was also done away with.
He said that they had followed all the contractual obligations before terminating services of the plaintiff. He claimed that prior notices were given to the plaintiff as the company was not satisfied with his performance.
Similarly, Mr Mehdi said there was no solid evidence to substantiate the plaintiff’s claim that he had suffered mental distress.
The court pointed out in its order that a junior counsel had appeared for the defendant company, requesting for adjournment. However, the court rejected his request, stating that previously opportunities were provided to the defence for cross examination of the plaintiff, but they delayed the matter.
The judge observed that the junior counsel claimed that his senior was ill and unable to attend the court, but no medical certificate was produced by him in that regard.
The court ruled that it was evident from the record that the plaintiff, an established journalist with over 25 years of experience, was engaged by the defendant on Oct 2021 as a staff member and formal employment contract was subsequently executed on July 1, 2022.
The court observed that on April 3, 2023, merely hours before the plaintiff was scheduled to depart for London to attend a prestigious international fellowship, the defendant abruptly terminated his employment through an email, citing ‘poor performance’ and blocked his official email access shortly thereafter.
The court observed that the plaintiff had produced credible evidence of his unblemished and distinguished 25-year journalistic career, which effectively rebutted the allegation of ‘poor performance’.
Published in Dawn, November 25th, 2025
