September 17, 2025
By Aitzaz Ibrahim

LAHORE

The Islamabad High Court, following a petition filed by digital rights activist Usama Khilji, has declared the appointment of Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) Chairman, Major General (R) Hafeez-ur-Rehman, as illegal and based on mala fide intent and has ordered his immediate removal.
In response the Chairman PTA has filed an intra-court appeal (ICA) against the decision, maintaining that he is performing his responsibilities in accordance with laws and regulations, and requested the court to fix the appeal for urgent hearing. Justice Babar Sattar issued a detailed written judgment.

Background

The case originated when in March 2023, the federal government advertised a new position of Member (Administration) in the PTA.
Khilji as petitioner argued that this post was illegally created because at that time there was no mention of such a position in the PTA’s appointment rules. The petitioner further stated that the entire process was designed to bring in a particular individual, constituting a violation of the Constitution and the law.
The court, during the initial hearing, directed the federation to make any such appointment subject to the final decision. Subsequently, during proceedings, it was revealed that Major General (R) Hafeez-ur-Rehman had first been appointed as Member (Administration) and later elevated as Chairman PTA.

The counsel for the petitioner argued before the court that, according to the PTA Act of 1996, the institution had space for only three members, and any new member could only be added after amending the law.

The advertisement was published on March 29, 2023, at a time when the rules contained no reference to “Member Administration.” Later, on May 4, 2023, an amendment was introduced into the rules, but by then the appointment process had already been completed. The age limit for the post was set at 61 years, higher than the 57-year limit for other members, specifically to make a particular candidate eligible.
Merit was also violated, as the panel from which the Chairman was chosen had Hafeez-ur-Rehman at the bottom of the merit list. The petitioner stressed that the entire process was a clear example of mala fide and favoritism in appointments, which must be declared void.

Government’s stance

Representing the federal government, the Additional Attorney General contended that the government had the authority to increase the number of PTA members, and the cabinet had approved it.
The process of amending the rules had already been initiated and was subsequently published in the official gazette. The Prime Minister also had the authority to appoint any PTA member as Chairman, therefore Hafeez-ur-Rehman’s appointment was legal. Counsel for the Chairman further argued that the petitioner was not an aggrieved party and, under the Constitution, could not pursue the case. He maintained that Hafeez-ur-Rehman had fulfilled all conditions, and the selection committee had included him in its recommendations.
Verdict
In his judgment, Justice Babar Sattar stated that the post of Member (Administration) was created illegally, and the advertisement for it was published when the rules contained no such provision. The later amendment to the rules was an attempt to retrospectively validate the process, which was against the principles of transparency and the Constitution. Increasing the age limit to 61 years was cited as an example of mala fide intent, as it created a pathway to bring in a specific individual.
Hafeez-ur-Rehman was placed at the bottom of the merit list in the selection committee’s panel, yet he was still chosen. The court held that all these steps were based on mala fide intent and that such favoritism in public appointments is unacceptable.