PESHAWAR: Peshawar High Court has declared the recruitment process of around 2,500 doctors and nurses by the provincial health department in accordance with law, but has directed the government to make the relevant grievance redressal committee fully functional for hearing complaint of an aggrieved candidate.

A bench consisting of Justice Wiqar Ahmad and Justice Inamullah Khan ruled: “Having considered the matter in its entirety, this Court has not been persuaded that the ongoing recruitment process suffers from any material illegality warranting interference in the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction.”

“Judicial intervention at this stage would inevitably impede and delay the recruitment of essential healthcare professionals, thereby adversely affecting the public interest and the provision of healthcare services throughout the Province, particularly in far-flung areas where the shortage of medical personnel is most acute,” the bench observed.

The bench on July 29 disposed of multiple petitions filed by several candidates requesting to declare as illegal the recruitment process of around 2,500 doctors and nurses and a notification issued on Feb 26, 2026, through which divisional commissioners were appointed as chairmen of departmental selection committee.

Directs health dept to make grievance committee fully functional

The bench referred individual grievances of the petitioners to the grievance redressal committee for decision.

In its 17-page detailed judgment the bench pointed out that the relevant advertisement envisaged the constitution of a grievance redressal committee for resolution of individual grievances arising out of the recruitment process.

“In the circumstances, it is directed that said Committee shall be made fully functional and shall effectively discharge its statutory mandate,” the bench ordered.

“The Committee shall afford every aggrieved candidate a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing, where so desired, and shall decide each grievance through a detailed and reasoned speaking order, clearly identifying the grievance raised, examining the relevant record and assigning cogent reasons for acceptance or rejection thereof,” the court ordered.

The bench further directed: “The decisions of the Grievance Redressal Committee shall be uploaded on the official website and shall also be communicated individually to the concerned candidates through their provided email addresses and mobile numbers. Any person remaining dissatisfied with decision of the Committee shall be at liberty to avail the appropriate remedy in accordance with law, including filing an independent constitutional petition before this Court, accompanied by a copy of the speaking order passed by the Committee.”

“Accordingly, the individual grievances raised in the present and connected writ petitions are referred to the Grievance Redressal Committee for adjudication strictly in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made hereinabove,” the bench ordered.

“The committee shall decide all such grievances by passing independent speaking orders. Upon such determination, the petitioners, if still aggrieved, shall remain at liberty to challenge same before the appropriate forum in accordance with law,” the bench maintained.

An additional advocate general, Asad Jan, and additional secretary health Minhasuddin had informed the bench that an unusually large number of vacancies had existed in various healthcare institutions, adversely affecting the delivery of medical services, particularly in remote and underdeveloped areas.

They stated that to address this shortage, the provincial government allocated substantial financial resources and adopted a decentralized mechanism by constituting divisional selection committees to ensure expeditious completion of the recruitment process.

The petitioners had raised multiple objections to the recruitment process, claiming that the respondents including the health department had unlawfully altered the selection criteria after commencement of the recruitment process; constituted the departmental selection committees chaired by respective divisional commissioners contrary to the applicable Rules; failed to ensure transparency in the preparation and publication of merit lists; and adopted an arbitrary and discriminatory method of evaluation during interviews.

They alleged several petitioners were either awarded unjustifiably low or zero interview marks, wrongly shown as absent, denied due weightage for their academic qualifications and experience, or otherwise deprived of fair consideration, while candidates possessing inferior merit were recommended for appointment.

They contended that Rule 4 of the KP Health Department Contract Appointment of Doctors (Fixed Pay) Rules, 2022, provided that only director general health should head the selection committee and not the commissioner.

The AAG rebutted the argument stating that amendments were made in the rules in 2026 whereby it was provided that any other person could be appointed as chairman of the committee by the secretary.

The bench observed that as the petitioners had not challenged the amended rules, the court couldn’t examine it in the present proceedings.

“Consequently, the legal position obtaining today is that the Rules expressly authorize constitution of the Selection Committee in the manner adopted by the respondents during the impugned recruitment process,” the bench ruled.

Published in Dawn, August 1st, 2026