On September 18, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) suspended its previous decision that had ordered the removal of Major General (retd) Hafeezur Rehman from his position as the chairman of the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA). The suspension came from a division bench comprising Justices Muhammad Asif and Inaam Ameen Minhas, following intra-court appeals against the single-bench ruling by Justice Babar Sattar.
Justice Sattar’s decision earlier in the week had declared Rehman’s appointment as PTA chairman “illegal” and “unconstitutional”. The appointment and the creation of the Member (Administration) post in the PTA were criticized for not adhering to lawful procedures and standards. The ruling highlighted that the advertisement for the chairman’s position was issued at a time when the position did not legally exist and the subsequent amendments to the PTA Appointment Rules were insufficient to legitimize the appointment process.
During proceedings, Advocate Qasim Wadud represented Rehman, while Additional Attorney General Salman Mansoor also presented arguments. Mansoor challenged the earlier ruling on procedural grounds, stating that the decision granted relief that was not requested in the initial petition. He emphasized that the rules governing the removal were not challenged, and no legal notice was issued to the Attorney General before the order, which he argued was necessary.
The court heard arguments that the earlier judgment was reserved without completing the hearing of all arguments and on a day when some counsel were unavailable. After considering these points, Justices Asif and Minhas decided to suspend Justice Sattar’s ruling, effectively reinstating Rehman as PTA chairman until further notice.
The legal battle began when a petition filed by digital rights activist Usama Khilji in 2023 led to the scrutiny of Rehman’s appointment. The initial ruling by Justice Sattar pointed to malice in law and a selection process tailored to accommodate a specific individual, citing an irregular higher age limit of 61 years for the post compared to 57 years for other members.
As the court has now suspended the removal order, the saga over the legality of Rehman’s appointment continues, with further proceedings expected to address the substantive legal challenges raised.
