Dr. ZUBAIDA CHAUDHARY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR vs PRESIDENT ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, PRESIDENT'S SECRETARIATE (PUBLIC) AIWAN-E-SADAR, ISLAMABAD S — 2026 PLC(CS) 1 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Citation: 2026 PLC(CS) 1 ISLAMABAD
Court: Islamabad High Court
Year: 2026
Reporter: PLC
Parties: Dr. ZUBAIDA CHAUDHARY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR vs PRESIDENT ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, PRESIDENT'S SECRETARIATE (PUBLIC) AIWAN-E-SADAR, ISLAMABAD S
Subject matter: Constitutional
Provisions referred to: S. 1

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

Dr. ZUBAIDA CHAUDHARY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR VS PRESIDENT ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, PRESIDENT'S SECRETARIATE (PUBLIC) AIWAN-E-SADAR, ISLAMABAD S.1(2)---Constitution (Eighteenth amendment) act (X of 2010), Preamble---Harassment at workplace, complaint of---absence of a Provincial forum at the time of filing of complaint---Jurisdiction to adjudicate complaint---Effect---Federal Ombudsman's competence / jurisdiction to adjudicate complaint in vacuum of Provincial forum---Scope---It was not until the promulgation of the Constitution (Eighteenth amendment) act, 2018 that the office of the Provincial Ombudsperson was formally instituted---Therefore, the act, 2010, enacted by the Federal Legislature, remained operative for addressing the governing workplace harassment across Pakistan---The petitioner approached the Federal Ombudsman under the act, 2010 who had assumed jurisdiction and rendered a decision---The Federal Ombudsman validly exercised jurisdiction in respect of the complaint dated 17-08-2016 as there was no Provincial Ombudsperson appointed in the Province before the act, 2018---Furthermore, the principle of acquiescence and waiver is not without relevance---The Federal Ombudsman/Respondent No. 2 assumed jurisdiction and the proceedings were contested, however, at no stage the matter qua jurisdiction was raised by either party---Thereafter, the Respondent No. 1 also assumed jurisdiction whilst rendering the impugned order dated 17-07-2017 without divulging into the maintainability---To raise it now amounted to a procedural ambush and could not be permitted to vitiate otherwise valid proceedings, particularly when no alternate remedy was available at the time of filing the complaint in 2016, as the Provincial Ombudsperson was only formally appointed after the promulgation of the amendment act, 2018---Complaint was maintainable and Constitutional petition filed by the victim was allowed.

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLC

2026 PLC(CS) 253 SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNAL-ISLAMABADMUHAMMAD SHABBIR VS REGISTRAR, ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT. Delegation of authority---Scope---Where the Constitution or the law does not itself pro…
2026 PLC(CS) 132 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRRaja TARIQ AZIZ VS AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR. S. 4---appeal before the Service Tribunal, filing of---Limitation---ap…
2026 PLC(CS) 132 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRRaja TARIQ AZIZ VS AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR. S. 4---appeal before the Service Tribunal, filing of---Locus standi---…
2026 PLC 107 FEDERAL-CONSTITUTIONAL-COURTEMPLOYEES OLD-AGE BENEFITS INSTITUTION, LAHORE VS MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE Beneficial legislation---Scope---Social welfare and beneficial statutes m…
2026 PLC 107 FEDERAL-CONSTITUTIONAL-COURTEMPLOYEES OLD-AGE BENEFITS INSTITUTION, LAHORE VS MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE Ss. 22(1)(b), 22a & Sched., Clause 1---Employees' old-age benefits---Roun…
2026 PLC 107 FEDERAL-CONSTITUTIONAL-COURTEMPLOYEES OLD-AGE BENEFITS INSTITUTION, LAHORE VS MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE Preamble---Provisions of Employees' Old-Age Benefits Act, 1976 have been…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English