Islamabad - The Islamabad High Court will today (Monday) resume the hearing of a petition moved by an acting director of ministry of foreign affairs, Yasir Mahmood who is facing departmental inquiry for his alleged role in leaking information to media.

A single member bench of IHC comprising Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb will conduct hearing of the petition in which the court had previously barred the ministry of foreign affairs from taking any adverse action against the petitioner and had also directed the ministry to produce relevant record before the court on the next hearing to be held on Monday.

According to details, the ministry has alleged that the acting director is accused of passing on some information which is a part of smear campaign and to distort image of the ministry. The stories were published in some newspapers regarding the financial irregularities allegedly committed by Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States Jalil Abbas Jillani when he was serving as foreign secretary. It was alleged in the news stories that the ministry officials hushed up an audit para for the recovery of Rs 4.8 million and the allotment of a plot of land, worth Rs 10 billion, to the Pakistan Foreign Office Women Association (PFOWA) free of cost, which the PFOWA sublet to a private school.

Earlier, an IHC bench had turned down Mahmood’s petition directing him to file the matter before federal services tribunal but he once again has approached the court saying that he has not been provided with a chance of fair trial.

He adopted in his petition that he had been on leave for over 2 years and never possessed any sensitive material. The petitioner alleged that he was being victimised to absolve the foreign secretary from responsibility of keeping the documents of his ministry in secure custody.

His counsel contended before the court that the departmental inquiry against his client was baseless and there was no evidence against him. His client was on leave but the ministry without providing him ample opportunity of defence charge-sheeted him.

He continued that his client has not been provided with the right of fair trial that is guaranteed under article 10-A of the Constitution. Therefore, he prayed to the court to provide him with a right to defend him in this matter.