PIA chief stopped from working on petition challenging appointment.

 
FREE EXCERPT

Byline: Ishaq Tanoli

KARACHI -- The Sindh High Court has restrained Air Marshal Arshad Malik from carrying out any function as the chief executive officer of Pakistan International Airlines till Jan 22 on a petition challenging his appointment.

A two-judge bench headed by Justice Mohammad Shafi Siddiqui also issued notices to respondents as well as the deputy attorney general for Jan 22.

The bench in its order said that the contentions raised by the petitioner's lawyer merited consideration, particularly the apparent titanic gulf between the CEO's education, qualification and experience and the job requirement.

In the meanwhile, the bench said that the PIA chief, chief human resource officer and the airline's board of directors, through its chairman/CEO, were restrained from carrying out any function as well as encumbering or disposing of assets of the national flag carrier valued over Rs10 million.

Petitioner Safdar Anjum, who is the general secretary of one of the associations of PIA senior staff/employee, submitted that he was filing the petition in the public interest and for enforcement of fundamental rights of all the members of the association and general public since the PIA was a national asset.

Impleading the PIA CEO, the federation through principal secretary to the prime minister, secretaries of the cabinet and aviation divisions, PIA and others as respondents, the petitioner stated that the Air Marshal Malik was a senior serving officer of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and his appointment as the PIA chief was made in utter disregard of law laid down by the apex court in its Aug 3, 2018 judgement against the appointment of the then CEO.

He maintained that the appointment was also made in violation of the Public Sector Companies (Corporate Governance) Rules of 2013 and Public Sector Companies (Appointment of Chief Executive) Guidelines of 2015 as both the laws were applicable to the PIA.

The lawyer for the petitioner argued before the bench that as evident from his job application, the main respondent was holding a basic BSc degree and seemed to have acquired qualifications in war studies.

He said clearly he lacked any qualifications, experience in commercial airline...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL