Dr. ZUBAIDA CHAUDHARY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR vs PRESIDENT ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, PRESIDENT'S SECRETARIATE

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

Dr. ZUBAIDA CHAUDHARY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR VS PRESIDENT ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, PRESIDENT'S SECRETARIATE (PUBLIC) AIWAN-E-SADAR, ISLAMABAD Ss.1(2), 3, 4 & 11---Workplace harassment complaint---Defective formation of inquiry committee, challenge to---Constituting an inquiry committee having gender disparity---Increasing the members of inquiry committee from three to five---Permissibility---Accused harassers not being subjected to cross-examination---Effect on inquiry proceedings---The petitioner (victim) was an 'associate professor' at a university who lodged a complaint before the Federal Ombudsman alleging various incidents occurring during her employment, after which the Ombudsman imposed penalties upon respondents Nos. 3 to 5 (accused harassers)---Both sides filed representations before the President of Pakistan, who dismissed the petitioner's representation while accepting those of Respondents Nos.3 to 5---The petitioner then filed the present constitutional petition challenging the President's order---Held: Perusal of the inquiry report showed that the harassment committee comprised of five members which was not in consonance with the mandate of S.3 of the Act, 2010---Section 3(2) of the Act, 2010 mandated in unequivocal terms that the inquiry committee had to consist of three members---The composition was further qualified by express criteria, i.e., one member must be awoman, one from senior management, and one a senior representative of the employees (or a senior employee where no CBA exists)---The statutory prescription of a three-member panel was deliberate and rooted in legislative intent, which was to ensure a fair, impartial, and gender-balanced inquiry process through acompact and manageable structure---Provisions of Ss. 3 and 11 of the Act were to be treated as mandatory in nature rather than directory---The organization, in the present case, had not constituted the inquiry committee in accordance with S. 3 of the Act, 2010 at the time of filing of the complaint by the petitioner, therefore, the organization constituting a five-member committee, having a gender disparity, expressly violated the mandatory provisions of the Act, 2010---Constitution of a five-member inquiry committee represented a flagrant departure from the mandatory structure---The inflation of membership from three to five was not atrivial or procedural irregularity; it constituted a patent illegality that struck at the root of the committee's jurisdiction---Record further revealed that the respondents Nos. 3 to 5, and their witnesses were not subjected to any meaningful cross-examination---An inquiry so conducted could not be sustained in the eyes of law and was liable to be declared void ab initio---Impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the respondent No. 1/President of Pakistan to decide the representation against the respondent No. 2/Federal Ombudsman's order in the light of interpretation of the term sexual harassment rendered by Supreme Court---Instant writ petition filed by the victim was allowed, in circumstances.

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

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLC