On Friday, President Dr Arif Alvi rejected a petition of a former bank official who was fired after being found guilty of harassing a lady and sought reinstatement on humanitarian grounds, Daily Times reported.
The Federal Ombudsman for the Protection of Women at Workplace dismissed the accused and filed an appeal against the verdict, which changed the punishment of “dismissal from service” to “removal from service.”
Dr. Arif Alvi affirmed the Ombudsman’s orders, saying that the petitioner was given the penalty of removal from service following an investigation into claims of harassment against him, and that the petitioner had failed to point out any irregularity with the learned ombudsman’s ruling.
According to the facts, Naeem Iqbal joined Bank Alfalah Ltd on 01.02.2006 as a Bank Cashier (Grade-1) and was then promoted to Operation Officer, Counter Services Manager, and Branch Operation Manager in 2010, 2014, and 2016, respectively.
Ms. Habiba Rauf had filed a complaint with the bank’s management, stating that the accused had harassed her. Iqbal was found guilty after an investigation and, as a result, was fired from Bank Alfalah Ltd.
After making a complaint to the competent authority, he filed an appeal with the Woman Ombudsman, who ruled that the accused’s appeal should be dismissed outright; however, given his long service and the fact that he has a large family, including small children and elderly parents, leniency in punishment appears to be more appropriate and closer to justice and fair play.
As a result, the ombudsman changed his punishment from “dismissal from service” to “removal from service” and dismissed his appeal. Following that, Naeem Iqbal submitted a request with the President to be reinstated into service.
The petitioner was seeking the setting aside of the bank’s order of 18.03.2019 and reinstatement into service only on humanitarian grounds, the President noted in dismissing his appeal.
On such grounds, the Ombudsman had already converted the punishment of dismissal to removal from service. The immediate representation is dismissed, according to President Alvi, because the petitioner failed to point out any illegality with the order and no grounds existed to interfere with the Ombudsman’s order.
