HSA VC Sacked for Abuse of Authority in Harassment Ruling
Nadeem Tanoli
Islamabad: In a significant ruling on workplace accountability in public universities, the Federal Ombudsperson for Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace has ordered the removal of Health Services Academy (HSA) Vice Chancellor (VC) Dr Shehzad Ali Khan after finding him guilty of quid pro quo sexual harassment of a former student and junior colleague.
The decision, issued in Complaint No. FOH-HQR-H/0341/2025, instituted on August 4, 2025, and titled Dr Shehzad Ali Khan vs Dr Ayesha Khan, rejected the Vice Chancellor’s allegations that he had been “honey trapped” and blackmailed.
The Ombudsperson held that in relationships marked by institutional power imbalance, particularly between teacher and student, consent has no legal validity.
Two separate complaints had been filed by both parties. As both stemmed from the same set of facts, they were consolidated for joint inquiry and adjudication.
In his complaint, the Vice Chancellor alleged that the respondent, initially his student in 2021 and later a contractual employee, blackmailed him and extracted Rs 27.44 million under the pretext of real estate investments.
He further claimed she threatened his family, demanded Rs 30 million, unlawfully retained an official vehicle, and misused access to his residence. He denied any inappropriate relationship and sought action against her.
Read More: https://thepenpk.com/pakistans-cpi-2025-score-exposes-accountability-deficit/
The female officer, however, alleged that the Vice Chancellor developed intimacy under a promise of marriage, made inappropriate remarks, misused his authority, and retaliated against her when she resisted. She also referred to an alleged incident dated July 17, 2025, for which criminal proceedings are pending before a competent court.
In its detailed order, the Ombudsperson analyzed the principles of quid pro quo harassment and hostile work environment, citing superior court precedents including PLD 2025 SC 354 and international jurisprudence such as Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson.
The ruling emphasized that consent is not a valid defense where a clear power imbalance exists, and that abuse of authority constitutes harassment regardless of apparent willingness.
The Ombudsperson noted that the Vice Chancellor admitted having hiring and firing authority over the complainant.
Despite later alleging manipulation, he appointed her to positions including Coordinator, Staff Officer, and Deputy Director without formal notification. Witness testimony, including that of PW-5 Brigadier (Retd.) Mehboob Qadir, confirmed that she exercised unusual access within the Vice Chancellor’s office, including occupying his chair and using official telephones without any disciplinary action.
WhatsApp messages placed on record showed the Vice Chancellor addressing her with affectionate terms such as “Zalim Princess,” “Lallo Jeenu,” and “Meenu,” and sending intimate and poetic messages, including one dated April 10, 2022, offering to reach her within ten minutes if needed.
The Ombudsperson found no credible evidence supporting the claim that his phone had been cloned and observed that no immediate complaint or legal action had been initiated by him regarding alleged digital manipulation.
On the financial allegations involving Rs 27.44 million and Rs 10 million from vehicle sale proceeds, the Ombudsperson held that no written agreement, contemporaneous complaint, or credible documentary proof was presented to substantiate claims of embezzlement or breach of trust.
Read More: https://thepenpk.com/governance-lapses-in-private-health-sector-draw-sharp-criticism/
Bank transactions alone were deemed insufficient to establish dishonest entrustment, and these allegations were rejected for lack of evidence.
Crucially, the ruling stated that in a teacher-student relationship, sexually colored conduct is morally and legally impermissible, regardless of whether it appears welcome. The decision held that the Vice Chancellor abused his institutional authority to develop inappropriate relations and extend undue professional benefits.
Applying the standard of preponderance of probabilities—and observing that the case had been proved “beyond a shadow of doubt”—the Ombudsperson dismissed the complaint filed by Dr Shehzad Ali Khan and upheld the complaint of the female officer.
He was found guilty of sexual harassment under Section 4(ii)(c) and 4(ii)(e) of the relevant law and ordered to be removed from service. The order further warned that if allowed to remain in office, he was likely to repeat such conduct.
The ruling underscores that no public office is above the law and that institutional authority cannot be used to leverage personal relationships. It also sends a strong message to public sector universities that professional boundaries, particularly between teachers and students, are legally non-negotiable.
Criminal proceedings related to FIRs filed by both parties remain pending before competent courts and were not adjudicated in these proceedings to avoid prejudice.
