High Court Questions Ombudsman’s Jurisdiction in Controversial Case
KARACHI — The Sindh High Court (SHC) has temporarily halted the dismissal of K-Electric CEO Moonis Alvi, suspending an earlier order issued by the Sindh Provincial Ombudsman, who had found Alvi guilty of workplace harassment.
The suspension came in response to a petition filed by Alvi, challenging both the verdict and the Rs2.5 million fine imposed by the Ombudsman for the Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace.
Legal Authority Under Scrutiny
Alvi’s legal team, led by Barrister Abid Zuberi, argued before Justice Faisal Kamal Alam that the Provincial Ombudsman lacked the authority to decide the case. According to Zuberi, such matters fall under the Federal Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, rendering the decision both procedurally flawed and legally invalid.
Following arguments, the SHC not only put the dismissal on hold but also directed Alvi to deposit the imposed fine with the court’s registry. Notices were issued to both the Provincial Ombudsman and the complainant, setting the stage for further hearings.
Background of the Complaint
The harassment complaint was originally filed by KE’s former Chief Marketing and Communication Officer. She accused Alvi, along with three other senior executives—including the Chief People Officer, Chief of Security, and a member of the Board’s HR Committee—of creating a hostile and intimidating work environment.
In a sharply worded decision, Ombudsperson Justice (retd) Shahnawaz Tariq underscored the gravity of the allegations, pointing to broader societal issues. “In our patriarchal society, it is incredibly difficult for women to report such incidents without fear of retaliation or damage to their reputations,” he wrote.
Tariq characterized workplace harassment as systemic abuse of power, not merely inappropriate behavior, and criticized what he called “the dark underbelly of corporate culture.”
CEO Responds: ‘False and Vindictive Allegations’
In his defense, Alvi claimed that the complainant was no longer employed by KE at the time the allegations were made, having been terminated a month earlier. He dismissed the charges as an act of revenge and asserted that the complaint did not meet the legal definition of harassment under the 2010 law.
Alvi also rejected claims of a toxic corporate culture at KE, insisting the organization promotes gender equality and has systems in place to handle misconduct.
Personal Impact and Public Statement
Taking to X (formerly Twitter), Alvi expressed deep personal distress over the ruling, calling it “painful both professionally and personally.” While voicing respect for the legal process, he insisted the findings “do not reflect the truth.”
“I remain committed to ensuring that the truth is fully brought to light, through all lawful means available,” he stated, adding that he is grateful to those who support him and believe in due process.
What’s Next
With the SHC now involved, the legal battle is likely to intensify over jurisdiction, evidence, and process. While Alvi retains his position for now, the case underscores growing scrutiny of corporate power structures and the mechanisms meant to protect employees—particularly women—in professional settings.
