Sindh Governor Kamran Tessori’s order on former K-Electric (KE) chief executive officer (CEO) representation against the provincial ombudsperson for protection against harassment of women was challenged in the Sindh High Court (SHC) on Friday.
The governor had earlier set aside the order of the Provincial Ombudsperson for the Protection against Harassment of Women at the Workplace that had found then KE CEO Moonis Alvi guilty of harassment and creating a hostile environment for a woman, and ordered his immediate removal from service.
The order came on Alvi’s representation against the ombudsperson’s order under the Section 9 of the Protection against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010. Petitioner Mahreen Aziz Khan submitted that the governor erred in his order by setting aside the provincial ombudsperson findings and observing that no written complaint on alleged harassment was filed with the KE’s relevant committee or any other authority.
She said that she had complied with the KE’s own reporting mechanism and rightly submitted a written complaint to the competent authority. She submitted that the governor erred in the law by passing the impugned order and failed to consider, appreciate the element of retaliation perpetrated against the petitioner which itself constituted harassment.
She also pointed out conflict of interest in the governor’s judgment submitting that the former KE CEO’s counsel was the same person who also represented the governor in the Supreme Court.
She requested the high court to set aside the Sindh governor’s order as it was passed in violation of fair trial and natural justice. Alvi had argued in his representation that the complaint was not maintainable before the ombudsperson because it was filed by a former employee of the KE, who had been terminated on account of poor work performance, to retaliate against her termination, and no harassment had been involved.
The governor had observed in his order that it had been established through conversations that the respondent was having work related issues at the KE. He said this had been corroborated by her WhatsApp conversation with Alvi, in which she asked him to assign her and her team work, and the email dated July 31, 2020, presented by the respondent, in which he had expressed dissatisfaction with her work performance. The ombudsperson completely ignored the evidence available on record to arrive at the conclusion, he added.
The order noted that a series of allegations had been made by the former employee covering the period from the start of her employment until her termination. It also recorded Alvi’s position that the employee had been asked to resign by the company’s Board HR Committee due to poor performance, while the complainant claimed that her termination was linked to her allegations against him.
It said Alvi’s witness had provided the minutes of meetings showing that the employee had been offered to resign and had later been terminated on the basis of unsatisfactory performance feedback.
The order observed that the decision to terminate had been taken by the Board HR Committee rather than the CEO, thereby negating the claims of retaliation against him. The provincial ombudsperson had earlier observed that allegations of sexual harassment levelled by the complainant were heinous in nature and revealed the dark side of the corporate sector.
The ombudsperson also observed that the chief people officer neglected his official duty, and instead of investigating the authenticity of the allegations of harassment, vulgar language and derogatory remarks involving the CEO, he favoured the CEO and directed the complainant to visit him on a daily basis.
