ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday summoned International Islamic University Islamabad (IIUI) Rector Samina Malik to appear in person before the court but later ordered her to leave the courtroom for evading questions being asked by the bench. Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, a three-judge bench also set aside July 16 appointment of Mohammad Sarwar as acting president of the university since the appointment was made without any approval from the varsity’s Board of Governors. The court had taken up a petition moved by Advocate Umer Ijaz Gillani on behalf of All Public Universities BPS Teachers Association (APUBTA) through its president Dr Samiur Rahman. In its last order, the CJP had observed that public universities must not leave vacant important positions of vice chancellors, presidents, vice presidents, registrars, heads of faculties and departments, controller of examinations and director finance as in doing so they contravene the applicable laws. Court sets aside appointment of university’s acting president as it was not approved by board of governors Reports furnished by the Higher Education Commission (HEC) as well as the Ministry for Federal Education and Professional Training stated that 55 senior posts in IIUI were being officiated through acting appointments. During the hearing, Advocate Rehanuddin Golra, who was representing the IIUI rector, told the court that his client was indisposed and therefore could not attend Friday’s court proceedings. A proper medical certificate along with an application has already been presented before the court, he said. At this, the CJP said that Samina Rashid had been mentioned in the application instead of Samina Malik, and summoned the rector to appear before the court in person for which the provision of an ambulance can be made by the court, if needed. Later, the rector appeared in the courtroom on a wheelchair, which let the counsel representing the rector to point out that the medical certificate he presented before the court was not fake since his client was genuinely suffering from the backbone issue. But the CJP observed that the use of different names in the application always give rise to doubts and regretted that the HEC had complained that whenever the rector was asked to attend a meeting regarding the vacant posts she resorted to excuses citing medical condition. The counsel however said that except for one, his client had always attended meetings online. “Is HEC office outside the city the meetings of which could not be attended by the rector in person,” wondered CJP, highlighting that the report of HEC had mentioned that letters issued by the commission had never been answered by the university. The counsel also objected to the presence of CJP in the bench on the grounds that he also was a member of the board of the university. The CJP however replied that under the law the CJP can be a member of boards of several universities. Later, he ordered the removal of the counsel from the rostrum who was taken out by the officials present in the courtroom. When the court asked the rector why she never attends meetings, she said she was under the influence of medicine and could not answer to queries of the court. She was also asked to leave. As the rector was leaving the courtroom, certain members of the press also accompanied her. At this, the CJP regretted that some hired journalists will now start abusing outside the courtroom, adding the easiest way was to abuse the CJP. “Should we start sending them to jail by initiating contempt of court proceedings,” he wondered. The rector should vacate the office if she cannot perform, the CJP observed. The HEC report stated that the university receives Rs2.1 billion grant annually in addition to Rs600 million from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, whereas the aggregate liability of the university was over Rs14 billion.