SHC throws out petition against Dr Nighat Shah’s reappointment

SHC throws out petition against Dr Nighat Shah's reappointment. Ishaq Tanoli Published August 20, 2026 Updated August 20, 2026 08: 34am.

Key points

• KARACHI: The Sindh High Court has dismissed for not being maintainable a petition challenging reappointment of a lately retired associate professor of the Jinnah Sindh Medical University (JSMU).
• Ishaq Tanoli is a Karachi-based reporter for Dawn with over 20 years of experience covering judicial and electoral affairs.
• It consequently could not dispense with the requirements of the JSMU Act, 2013.
• It observed that the constitutional jurisdiction of this court was subject to the condition that no other adequate remedy was provided by law.
• Bench rules high court cannot act as appellate forum over cabinet decisions.

Petitioner Dr Memoona Rehman, an associate professor at the JSMU, moved the SHC against the Aug 5 decision of the Sindh cabinet and a subsequent letter issued by the Universities & Board Department regarding the impugned appointment of Dr Nighat Shah on Aug 10.

Her counsel Malik Naeem Iqbal submitted in the petition that his client, being a regularly appointed associate professor in the same specialty, was directly aggrieved by the impugned re-employment of Dr Shah as it affected her legitimate expectation and prospects of promotion to the post of professor.

According to He additionally, the reemployment / contractual appointment of Dr Shah for three years was produced through a person-specific cabinet decision just a couple of days before her superannuation and the same was illegal, without lawful authority and void ab for being contrary to the JSMU Act, 2013 and the statutes framed thereunder.

Meanwhile, the lawyer maintained that since the post was already advertised and a competitive selection process was underway, there was neither any exigency nor exceptional circumstance justifying such re-employment of private respondent rendering the impugned action colourable and discriminatory.

Notably, a two-judge constitutional bench headed by Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon remarked that it heard the petitioner's counsel on the maintainability of the petition under Article 199 of the Constitution and perused the record with his assistance.

In practice, the petition was brought by an aggrieved party and therefore, the petitioner must cross these two jurisdictional hurdles besides challenging the decision of cabinet being a policy matter, it continued.

"Where neither condition is satisfied, this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the petition, unless the impugned order is shown to be mala fide, which is not the case in the present matter as the decision has been made by the cabinet, " it continued.

According to The bench in its order further, the directions were issued for the impugned appointment pursuant to a policy decision of the provincial cabinet, which considered the matter in the larger public interest and with a view to ensuring continuity of specialised healthcare services, academic leadership, postgraduate medical education, research and institutional excellence.

"In exercise of the constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the high court does not sit as an appellate forum over the decisions of the cabinet, particularly where such decisions fall within the administrative or executive domain and are taken in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law and pursuant thereto, the universities & boards department directed the Vice-Chancellor to take necessary action for her appointment strictly in accordance with the prescribed procedure and applicable provisions of the said PM&DC Notification, which decision prima facie has not been made, " the court order reads.

Although founded upon stated considerations of public interest and institutional continuity, did not itself appoint respondent No 6, but directed consideration of her appointment in accordance with the prescribed procedure, the bench remarked, The cabinet decision dated 05.08.2026.

In practice, the Statutes or the applicable recruitment framework. This assumes greater significance since the post of Professor in Gynaecology & Obstetrics and re-employment immediately upon superannuation, for a further period of three years, requires consideration by the respondent university under the law, the bench observed.

Dismissing the petition in limine, the bench stated that PM&DC's notification itself required that contractual engagement of retired faculty should not adversely affect the promotion prospects or career progression of serving faculty.

Ishaq Tanoli is a Karachi-based reporter for Dawn with over 20 years of experience covering judicial and electoral affairs. As well as election matters, his reporting focuses on the proceedings of the Supreme Court and Sindh High Court. He can be discovered on X at @ishaqtanolihotm.

In short, SHC throws out petition against Dr Nighat Shah's reappointment is the central thread here, and readers can expect follow-up reporting as the picture becomes clearer.