KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Friday suspended the provincial ombudsman’s directive to dismiss K-Electric (KE) Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Moonis Alvi, who was earlier found guilty of harassing a female employee.
The court announced the verdict on a plea filed by the K-Electric CEO seeking to overturn the Sindh Provincial Ombudsman order.
The development comes a day after the Sindh ombudsman for protection against harassment of women at workplaces ordered Alvi’s removal from service instantly, along with a penalty of Rs2.5 million.
The power company’s former chief marketing and communication officer had filed a complaint, accusing CEO Alvi, Chief People Officer Rizwan Dallia, Chief of Security Col (retd) Wahid Asghar and Member of the Board of Directors and Chairman of the Board HR Committee Khalid Rafi of “causing harassment, intimidation and mental agony”.
The K-Electric CEO appeared before the court today alongside his lawyer, Barrister Abid Zuberi.
During the hearing, SHC Justice Faisal Kamal Alam questioned the legal basis of the ombudsman’s order, asking what was wrong with the decision.
To which, Moonis Alvi’s lawyer argued that the Federal Ombudsman has the authority to hear the case, not the Provincial Ombudsman and pleaded his client’s removal and penalty as unlawful.
After hearing arguments, the court suspended the provincial ombudsman order and directed the KE chief executive officer to deposit a fine of Rs2.5 million with the court’s registry.
The SHC also issued notices to the Provincial Ombudsman and the complainant in the case.
‘Conservative and patriarchal society’
In his written order, Ombudsperson Justice (retd) Shahnawaz Tariq observed that the allegations of sexual harassment are heinous in nature and reveal the dark side of the corporate sector.
“In our conservative and patriarchal society, it is usually difficult for a woman to report such deeply disturbing incidents due to fear of future career prospects; apprehension of counter allegations hurled against her character, and to protect her dignity, self-esteem and self-respect amongst her family, friends, organization, and society at large where prevailing notions of honour and taboos play a dominant role,” Justice Tariq said.
He noted, “The employer, supervisor, or manager under any circumstances has no right to disrespect, insult, or abuse his subordinates, especially women as this offensive behaviour of the employer constitutes harassment as envisaged under section 2(h) of the Act, 2010.
“Indeed, workplace harassment is characterised by a sustained pattern of mistreatment influenced by gender, power relations, or hierarchical disparities, which cultivates an atmosphere of fear and oppression in the workplace. Sexual harassment is widely recognised as a reflection of power dynamics, rather than simply a sexual act, highlighting its deep ties to workplace harassment and the broader context of gender inequality.”
In his defence, Moonis Alvi stated that the services of the complainant were terminated one month prior to the institution of her complaint, and as such she was not an employee of KE and the allegations levelled in the complaint do not fall within the ambit of harassment.
He denied that the culture at KE is patriarchal, sexist and offensive to women, but the company believes in equal opportunities for women and men, while the HR department is actively vigilant in case of any misdemeanour and has also constituted an inquiry committee in terms of the Act.
He said he was highly professional with an exceptional performance record and enjoys a good reputation in the industry, but the complainant has levelled false allegations against him only to take revenge for her termination.
‘Deeply distressing’
On the social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter), K-Eectric CEO Alvi said he has always upheld the values of integrity and dignity in professional interactions, and he deeply believes in fostering safe and inclusive workplaces for all.
He said: “The recent verdict is deeply distressing to me. While I respect the legal process and the institutions that uphold it, I must, in good conscience, state that the findings do not reflect the truth of the situation as I experienced it. This has been a painful journey — not just professionally, but personally.”
“It is for anyone who feels wronged to be heard. I remain committed to ensuring that the truth is fully brought to light, through all lawful means available.
“In the meantime, I remain grateful for the support of those who know me, who have worked alongside me, and who believe in due process. My respect for the principles of justice and workplace dignity remains unwavering.”
