LAHORE: In a disturbing breach of legal and administrative norms, the Employees Old-Age Benefits Institution (EOBI) is engulfed in a serious governance crisis, stemming from the alleged unlawful appointment and conduct of an acting chairman.

According to Section 8(A)1 of the EOBI Act, 1976, the appointment of the EOBI chairman is the exclusive prerogative of the federal government, which, as per interpretation under the Rules of Business, 1973, means the federal cabinet.

The cabinet had earlier approved assigning the additional charge of the EOBI chairman to the secretary of Human ResourceDevelopment. However, that additional charge lapsed after the then regular chairman Khakan Murtaza joined on Aril 19, 2024. After Mr Murtaza`s retirement, no fresh appointment or charge assignment was made by the cabinet. The secretary, without any lawful authority, assigned a `Look-After` charge to a junior officer, Javed Sheikh, against the rules of business.

But Mr Sheikh, a deputy director general (BPS-20), entrusted with routine administrative matters only under the `Look-After charge`, began presenting himself as the acting chairman a status he was never legally granted.

The irregularities do not end there. Mr Sheikh`s own absorption into the EOBI was itself illegal. Originally sent on deputation from another department (State Life), he remained within the EOBI in blatant violation of Supreme Court orders mandating the return of all deputationists to their parent organisations. Furthermore, a scrutiny committee, constituted under EOBI OfficeOrder No. 269/2017 in compliance with apex court orders, concluded that at the time of his absorption, Mr Sheikh did not meet the prescribed eligibility criteria. His academic qualifications were unrelated to the position, and his professional experiencefellfar short ofthe required threshold.

Despite these glaring deficiencies, he was irregularly absorbed into EOBI, raising serious concerns about transparency and adherence to merit within the institution.

During his unauthorised tenure, instead of restricting himself to routine matters, Mr Sheikh actively involved himself in highlevel policy decisions. He convened three meetings of the HR Committee and two meetings of the Board of Trustees, bypassing the limited scope allowed under the `Look-After` arrangement.

Moreover, he engaged in investment decisions where he was only supposed to implement the recommendations of the Investment Committee and Fixed Income Department; instead, he acted as a decision-maker himself, exposing the EOBI to significant procedural violations and conflicts of interest.

In another controversial move, he oversaw the removal of accountability clauses from the record checking standard operating procedure (SOP) previously approved by the regular chairperson, thus undermining internal controls critical for safeguarding institutional integrity.

Alarmingly, while entrusted with overseeing daily affairs, Mr Sheikh frequently operated from outside station locations, issuing approvals online a clear neglect of the `Look-After` responsibilities assigned to him.

HRD Secretary Dr Arshad Mahmood was sent written queries, including why a regular chairman is not being appointed, why Mr Sheikh is not only being maintained in the EOBI in violation of the SC verdict and against the recommendations of the highlevel internal committee formed to implement the verdict but also has been posted tothe highest office despite not holding relevant qualifications.

Dr Mahmood said Mr Sheikh is a `formal` employee of the EOBI and being the most senior one (deputy director-general) had been given charge of the institution temporarily. He hoped the federal government would appoint a regular chairman soon but would not say if any summary for the purpose had been forwarded to the cabinet division.

He claimed that no other officer was ready to go to Karachi, where the head office of the EOBI was located, so he had been left with the limited scope to consider anyone else for the post.

The secretary did not comment on the finding of the internal committee that had declared back in 2017 that Mr Sheikh neither had the required qualifications nor experience to remain within EOBI what to talk of heading the institution.

Mr Sheikh did not respond to the queries sent to him that included his questionable absorption in the EOBI.