PIMS Gynecology appointments face scrutiny as senate, NA committees examine allegations against Dr. Nousheela Amjad

Questions surrounding appointments, cadre changes and promotions in the Gynecology and Mother & Child Health

ISLAMABAD: Questions surrounding appointments, cadre changes and promotions in the Gynecology and Mother & Child Health (MCH) Department of the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) have reached committees of both the National Assembly and Senate following reports by Minute Mirror based on documents related to the matter.

Several allegations have been raised against Dr. Nousheela Amjad, including an alleged backdated redesignation, questions over the counting of clinical experience and the simultaneous holding of important administrative and clinical positions. Lawmakers and members of the medical community have called for a formal review to establish whether all relevant rules and procedures were followed.

According to records reviewed in connection with the matter, Dr. Nousheela Amjad joined PIMS in 2016 as Deputy Director (BPS-18). Before joining PIMS, she was reportedly serving in an administrative position in Karachi. Her appointment at the time reportedly attracted no significant objection, as it was considered an administrative-to-administrative move.

The main controversy concerns a redesignation order issued in July 2020. Under the order, Dr. Nousheela was reportedly redesignated as Assistant Professor Gynecology (Clinical), instead of continuing as Deputy Director (Admin).

The development has raised questions about whether an officer belonging to an administrative cadre could be transferred or redesignated into a clinical teaching cadre without fulfilling the applicable service and qualification requirements.

Another issue concerns the effective date of the redesignation. It has been alleged that the order was made effective retrospectively from 2015. If established through official records, this could mean that part of her administrative service between 2016 and 2020 was treated as clinical gynecology experience.

Questions have also been raised regarding the experience required for promotion to Associate Professor of Gynecology. According to the allegations, service as Medical Officer Gynecology and Senior Registrar Gynecology is required under the relevant rules.

Critics claim that Dr. Nousheela did not complete the required period in these positions, while certain documents or experience certificates were allegedly used to establish the necessary experience.

Another point under scrutiny is her reported service with the Ministry of Population, where she allegedly worked as a Research Officer. Questions have been raised over whether such service could legally be counted as clinical experience equivalent to that of a Medical Officer.

Dr. Nousheela was promoted to Associate Professor (BPS-19) in 2021. Questions have subsequently been raised about the seniority lists, the departmental promotion process and the documents considered by the relevant authorities.

The allegations further state that she continued to hold the positions of HOD Gynecology and Director MCH simultaneously until 2025. Critics argue that the arrangement may have affected opportunities for other senior doctors.

There are also claims concerning the custody of her service file and the alleged involvement of her husband, who reportedly held an influential administrative position. These claims require verification through official records and an independent inquiry.

The matter has now been taken up by committees of both the National Assembly and Senate. Lawmakers have raised questions concerning merit, transparency and compliance with service rules and have called for a detailed examination of the appointments and promotions.

The Ministry of National Health Services has yet to issue an official response to the allegations.

Disclaimer: The allegations in this report are based on claims and documents available to Minute Mirror. The allegations have not been independently established, and a formal investigation by the relevant authorities is required to determine the facts and responsibility, if any.