August 15, 2026
By Hashir Ahsan
ISLAMABAD
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has suspended the implementation of removal orders against Professor Shahzad Ali Khan, Vice-Chancellor of the Health Services Academy (HSA), in a high-profile workplace harassment case.
Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar issued an interim order on Professor Shahzad’s petition, declaring that the points raised require formal judicial consideration. The court issued notices to all parties and stayed both the Federal Ombudsperson for Protection Against Harassment (FOSPAH) order sentencing Professor Shahzad to removal from service, and the decision by the President of Pakistan rejecting Professor Shahzad’s appeal and maintaining his dismissal.
Following the interim judicial relief, Professor Shahzad stated that he has returned to his position as Vice-Chancellor and will officially resume office upon receiving the written court order.
Legal Arguments Before the High Court
During proceedings, counsel for Professor Shahzad argued on various points:
Initial complaint: The Vice-Chancellor originally approached FOSPAH against the contract employee over allegations of blackmailing, threats, and financial irregularities, after which a counter-complaint was filed against him.
No sexual harassment found by President: The President of Pakistan noted in his decision that this was not a case of sexual harassment and highlighted no specific incident.
Lack of defense: Despite this, the dismissal was maintained on grounds of retaliation, creating a hostile work environment, and gender-based harassment without granting Professor Shahzad an opportunity for an effective defense against these specific claims.
Background & FOSPAH Decision
On February 13, FOSPAH issued a written judgment holding Professor Shahzad guilty of severe illegal abuse of authority, sexual harassment, and “Quid Pro Quo” harassment against a former student and junior research assistant, ordering his immediate removal from service.
FOSPAH consolidated both complaints into a joint investigation.
The Vice-Chancellor’s claims were as follows:
- The woman was admitted to the MSc Public Health program in 2021. After complaints regarding her conduct, he counseled her.
- He alleged she subjected him to a “honey-trap” and blackmailed him into transferring 27.44 million rupees under the guise of real estate investments.
- He accused her of embezzling 10 million rupees from vehicle sales, cloning his phone, threatening his wife, and demanding an additional 30 million rupees.
- He maintained her service was terminated following an internal inquiry, leading her to file false complaints.
Meanwhile the complainant’s defense and allegations mentioned exploitation of power and position and harassment and assault.
- She denied all allegations, stating the VC leveraged his position to seek inappropriate intimacy, promised marriage, and used her bank account for personal transactions.
- She cited inappropriate WhatsApp messages (“Zalim Princess,” “Lallo Jeenu, Meenu, Love you good night”) and alleged physical assault inside an official vehicle on July 17, 2025.
- She said that when she resisted his continuous exploitation, he blocked an FIR registration, terminated her employment, and canceled her academic admission.
FOSPAH’s findings & forensic Evidence
In rejecting the Vice-Chancellor’s defense, the Federal Ombudsperson highlighted several key findings. This includes extraordinary official access by the student.
Despite being a student/junior employee, the VC appointed her as Deputy Director and Staff Officer, allowing her to represent him at top-level official meetings (including the President House, Prime Minister’s Secretariat, Senate, National Assembly, and SIFC). FOSPAH ruled that granting such access contradicted claims of being blackmailed.
FOSPAH also said that the WhatsApp messages sent from the VC’s number included late-night romantic poetry and messages offering immediate assistance. The court rejected claims of phone cloning due to a lack of prior police complaints.
The VC failed to produce written proof or initiate legal recovery proceedings for the alleged 27.44 million rupees prior to July 2025.