Peshawar High Court blocks deportation of two Afgh…

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has taken notice of the failure to conduct a CT angiography (CTA) test at the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) after PTI founder Imran Khan was taken to the hospital for a medical examination. The prime minister has formed an inquiry committee to investigate why the recommended cardiac test could not be performed and determine whether the required facilities were available at the hospital. The committee will be headed by the secretary of the Establishment Division and will include senior officials and medical experts from the National Health Services ministry, Armed Forces Institute of Cardiology (AFIC) and PIMS. The inquiry will examine whether PIMS had the technical capacity to conduct CTA scans since 2022. It will also determine whether the necessary equipment, software and trained staff were available when the test was recommended. The committee will review hospital records to establish how many CTA procedures have been conducted at PIMS since 2022 and whether patients requiring the test were routinely referred to private medical facilities. The investigation will also examine coordination between the cardiology and radiology departments and determine whether administrative shortcomings contributed to the failure to conduct the test. According to hospital officials, Imran Khan was brought to PIMS in the early hours of Friday for a medical check-up. His CTA was recommended, but the test was not carried out and he was subsequently taken back to Adiala Jail. The issue has raised questions about the availability and use of diagnostic facilities at the public-sector hospital. Officials said a CTA machine in the cardiac centre had remained out of service for years, while another machine in the radiology department was reportedly operational. The inquiry will specifically determine whether hospital staff were aware of the functioning radiology facility and why the patient was not referred there for the required examination. The committee will also investigate whether poor coordination, mismanagement or a misunderstanding between departments caused the failure and whether any officials should be held responsible. It has further been tasked with examining referrals to private hospitals, including whether any particular private facility was repeatedly preferred and whether such referrals resulted in the diversion of patients and revenue from the public hospital. Prime Minister Shehbaz has directed the committee to conduct a comprehensive review of all relevant records and facts and submit its findings. Further action will be taken on the basis of the inquiry report and in accordance with the law.

Islamabad: A controversy has emerged over the recruitment process of Allama Iqbal Open University (AIOU) after the Wafaqi Mohtasib declared that the selection process for senior academic positions lacked transparency and directed the university to cancel appointments and repeat the process. The decision came after a complaint filed by a female complainant, who challenged her exclusion from the shortlist for Professor and Associate Professor positions despite claiming she met the required eligibility criteria. The Wafaqi Mohtasib, after reviewing documents and hearing both sides, concluded that maladministration was established and stated that serious questions were raised about the transparency of the selection process. The Ombudsman referred the matter to the Vice Chancellor of AIOU with directions to cancel the appointments and conduct the recruitment process again according to proper procedures. The controversy relates to faculty recruitment advertisements issued by AIOU for Professor and Associate Professor positions. According to the findings, AIOU advertised several academic positions on 15 September 2024, and received a large number of applications. Officials informed that 388 applications were received for 25 advertised Professor and Associate Professor positions. The university introduced an Internal Assessment Framework to shortlist candidates before sending applications for further evaluation. According to AIOU, the decision was taken because evaluating hundreds of academic files through experts would create major financial and administrative difficulties. Officials estimated that external evaluation of dossiers could cost around Rs26 million. Under the new system, eligible candidates were assessed through multiple stages including vision statement, leadership assessment, psychological assessment, teaching demonstration and screening interview. The assessment was conducted out of 50 marks, and 24 candidates were recommended for further selection stages. However, the female complainant was not recommended for any position. The female complainant challenged the process, arguing that the university changed recruitment procedures after the hiring process had already started. She claimed that according to the original recruitment rules, eligible candidates were required to appear before the Selection Board and that the introduction of an Internal Assessment as an elimination stage had no legal basis. She also argued that she was not properly informed about all stages of the assessment process. The complainant stated that she was informed about teaching demonstration and leadership assessment but was not informed about psychological assessment and screening interview. The complaint also raised concerns over fair hearing rights, claiming that she was excluded from the final process without written reasons or an opportunity to explain her position. Another serious issue raised was the timing of the Selection Board meeting. The complainant claimed that the Selection Board meeting took place on 10 April 2026, a public holiday, and that the approval process and appointment letters were completed unusually quickly on the same day. She questioned whether the process was properly transparent. She argued that recruitment rules and selection criteria should not be changed after the recruitment process has started. The Ombudsman examined the matter and found that the selection process did not appear transparent. The findings stated that several questions raised by the complainant required attention and that the recruitment process showed signs of maladministration. AIOU officials had defended the process, saying the Internal Assessment Framework was approved by the university’s Executive Council and applied to the advertised positions. They said the system was designed to identify the most competitive candidates while reducing time and financial burden. The case now requires AIOU to report compliance with the Ombudsman’s decision within the given period. The controversy has raised broader questions about transparency, fairness and recruitment procedures in public sector universities, where senior academic appointments directly affect the quality of education.