KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Tuesday set aside the appointment of the provincial director of the National Cyber Crimes Investigation Agency (NCCIA) and ordered the authorities concerned to appoint the senior-most eligible officer for the look-after charge of the post till regular promotion.
A two-judge constitutional bench of the SHC, headed by Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, noted that the post in question could not have been filled through a look-after charge in favour of a junior officer in the presence of the senior-most eligible officer.
It further observed that the impugned actions of the respondents appeared to be arbitrary, without lawful authority and in violation of the statutory rules as well as the principles laid down by the superior courts.
Citing the secretary of the ministry of interior, the director general of NCCIA, the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and Additional Director Amir Nawaz as respondents, Shahzad Haider approached the SHC and submitted that he was holding the charge of director of the NCCIA of Sindh, but in April last year Mr Nawaz, an officer junior than the petitioner and five others, was posted to look after the charge of the director (BS-20) in his own pay and scale.
The counsel for the petitioner, Barrister Zameer Hussain Ghumro, argued that the impugned order regarding the appointment of the acting director was illegal and violated the statutory rules, as the respondents had failed to fill the post through proper promotion and instead assigned it arbitrarily to a junior officer.
Assistant Advocate General Wajiha Mehdi submitted that seniority alone did not confer entitlement to such temporary assignments and also questioned the jurisdiction of the SHC, arguing that the matter fell within the domain of the services tribunal.
The bench, in its order, noted that the petition revolved around the legality of granting a look-after charge of a BS-20 post to a junior officer and the legal status of officers transferred from the FIA cybercrime wing to NCCIA after the 2025 amendment to the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016.
It also observed that the position in question was to be filled through regular promotion on the recommendation of the central selection board and, as per rules, the senior-most eligible officer may be given acting charge as a temporary arrangement.
Regarding the transfer of officers from FIA to NCCIA, the bench further said that the FIA cybercrime wing stood dissolved and all its personnel, cases and assets were transferred to NCCIA through a notification issued on April 25, last year. Therefore, the subsequent surrender of services of the petitioner back to the FIA through an office appeared to be without lawful authority.
It noted that the impugned order suffered from legal infirmity, arbitrariness and appeared to have been issued without jurisdiction.
“Resultantly, the impugned office order dated 30.04.2025, to the extent it grants look-after charge of the post of director (BS-20) to respondent No.4 and surrenders the services of the petitioner, is declared to be without justification and of no legal effect. The respondents are directed to assign acting charge of the post of director to the senior-post eligible officer till regular promotion is made through the competent forum in accordance with law,” it added.
Published in media, April 8th, 2026
American Dollar Exchange Rate