Reply sought in transplant authority DG case

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Monday sought a reply from the provincial government on a petition challenging appointment of Prof Dr Faisal Masood as director general of Punjab Human Organ Transplant Authority (PHOTA).

Renowned orthopedic surgeon Prof Dr Amir Aziz had questioned the appointment of Prof Faisal Masood through a public interest petition.

During the first hearing of the petition, petitioner’s counsel Nasir Qureshi argued that the post of director general/administrator of PHOTA had never been advertised by the government as per rules. He said the respondent himself had advertised the post when he had additional charge of PHOTA DG being vice-chancellor of King Edward Medical University. He said the terms and conditions, including eligibility criteria was finalised and advertised by Prof Faisal Masood himself, which in fact was required to be done by the government.

The counsel pointed out that even as per advertised terms and conditions, the respondent was not eligible to apply for the post. It was a settled law that no one can be judged in his own cause and the respondent by advertising the eligibility criteria for the post himself, for having conflict of interests, was not eligible to apply for the post, he added.

He stated that services of the respondent, a retired government servant, were not indispensable, and if the post was advertised by the competent authority there would have been numerous eligible candidates for the post.

The counsel urged the court to set aside the appointment of Prof Faisal Masood as director general of PHOTA illegal and order the government to appoint a qualified person against the post in a transparent manner.

A lawyer appeared on behalf of Prof Masood and told the court that his client had been holding the post following the direction of the Supreme Court. Petitioner’s counsel, at this, asked the court to summon copy of the order referred to by the respondent’s counsel. Justice Chaudhry Iqbal adjourned hearing until August 27 and sought written replies from the government and the respondent’s counsel.