PESHAWAR: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Medical Teaching Institutions (MTI) Appellate Tribunal has temporarily stopped management of Hayatabad Medical Complex (HMC) from issuing final order regarding appointment against the post of specialist registrar, endocrinology.

A bench of the tribunal consisting of its chairman retired Justice Abdul Shakoor and members Mansoor Tariq and Abdul Ghafoor Qureshi issued notice to the HMC medical director, seek-ing his comments to an appeal filed by one of the candidates for the post, Dr Sana, challenging the interview process on different grounds.

The tribunal directed the respondent MTI to proceed with the selection process for the post of specialist registrar, endocrinology, but should not make a final order. The tribunal fixed June 18 for next hearing of the matter.

The appellant has requested the tribunal to declare as illegal and set aside the interview process notified on Mar 5, 2025,and conductingthe same on Mar 11, 2025.

She also sought directives of the tribunal for respondents including the HMC medical directorfor re-conducting the interview as per the mandate of law, rules and regulations.Barrister Huzaifa Ahmad appeared for the appellant and contended that the respondents were bent upon appointing one of their favourites against the said post due to which they had conducted multiple illegalities in the interview process.

He stated that his client being an extraordinary student had remained distinguished throughout her academic journey and had scored first position throughout Peshawar in the year 2007 in Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Peshawar (BISEP).

He said that in her professional medical education journey she stood amongst the high achievers and secured second position in her second annual professional examination of Khyber MedicalUniversity. At both of the instances, she was awarded with certificates.

He stated that the appellant possessed two specialisation fellowship qualifications (FCPS), as she had done her first fellowship in the year 2021 in general medicine, followed by specialisation in endocrinology in the year 2024.

He said that the appellant being a specialist in endocrinology had completed her training as trainee medical officer (TMO) at endocrinology ward of HMC.

Barrister Huzaifa said that the appellant had applied for the contractual post of `specialist registrar, endocrinology` that was advertised on Nov 25, 2024. He claimed that after applying for thepost, his client was shocked to know that despite being most suitable candidate for the post her application was not initially scrutinised by the committee following which she filed an application on Jan 20, requesting for awarding her preinterview marks, where after her name was included in the list.

He claimed that the appellant had the highest score at the pre-interview stage. He alleged that the respondents were unduly backing their favourite candidates who at the pre-interview stage had scored way less than the appellant.

He said that earlier out of the way favours were given to one of the respondents as well in shape of appointing him`acting registrar` whilst he was serving as a TMO at endocrinology ward.

He also referred to role of an associate professor of the said ward stating that he had developed a grudge against the appellant despite the fact that she was junior to him. He claimed that the said respondent had earlier brought up a frivolous complaint against the appellant, which was closed without further investigation and enquiry.

Apart from the said professor, he said, the panel of interviewers included a specialist in general medicines, who was not even an endocrinologist. He also referred to some other alleged irregularitiesintheinterview process.