Islamabad's Presidency has delivered a split decision that leaves a former vice chancellor out of a job while dismantling the legal foundation of the harassment case against him. Dr Shahzad Ali Khan, who led the Health Services Academy (HSA), lost his appeal against dismissal, but the President's Office simultaneously ruled that the Federal Ombudsperson for Protection against Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Fospah) had mischaracterised the entire dispute. The detailed order, issued Tuesday, upheld the February 13 penalty of removal from service, yet it rejected Fospah's core reasoning. The Presidency observed that the case was not a textbook instance of workplace sexual harassment but rather a bitter personal dispute between Dr Khan and his female subordinate. Main Developments Fospah's original conviction was built on what the Presidency called "highly abstract and academic" reasoning. The lower tribunal failed to frame distinct issues, ignored the critical chronology of events, and incorrectly applied the precedent in PLD 2025 SC 354 without establishing factual parallels. Read also: Why KP Police Are Getting Dragon APCs and Forklifts Now Dr Khan's own testimony contained glaring contradictions, including his admission of being "honey-trapped" while simultaneously denying any inappropriate relationship. The Presidency specifically rejected Fospah's finding that the onus lay on the complainant to prove she did not harass a student over whom she exercised dominance, calling that position "unsustainable as a matter of law and logic." Despite this, the dismissal was maintained on separate grounds. The order noted that Dr Khan did not approach the president with "clean hands," pointing to his dismissal of his female subordinate's services on July 18, 2025—just one day after she registered an FIR against him. That conduct, the Presidency ruled, created a hostile work environment and constituted gender-based harassment. Background The dispute between Dr Khan and the woman, who served under him, has been brewing for years. She claimed they had a verbal nikah and that Dr Khan promised to marry her; he denied any such union, describing the relationship as "prima facie mutual and consensual" over roughly five years. Dr Khan also alleged the woman defrauded him of Rs27.44 million, but the ombudsperson found these financial allegations lacked documentary corroboration and contemporaneous legal action. The Presidency did not disturb that finding. Why It Matters The ruling highlights a growing tension between workplace harassment protections and personal disputes that spill into professional settings. The Presidency's decision suggests that even when the specific charges of sexual harassment are not sustained, other forms of misconduct—such as retaliatory dismissal—can justify severe penalties. It also underscores the jurisdictional boundaries: questions of marriage, divorce, and maintenance belong to family courts, not workplace tribunals. The order advised Dr Khan to file a suit for jactitation of marriage if he denies the union, and the woman to pursue marital rights through proper legal channels. What's Next Cross-FIRs and legal proceedings between the two parties remain pending in other forums. Dr Khan, now effectively removed from his post, may pursue further legal remedies, while the woman retains the option to file for divorce or claim maintenance in family court.