Shoaib Akhtar, a former Pakistan cricketer, expressed his disappointment on Sunday after Pakistan Television Corporation (PTV) took legal action against him and handed a Rs100 million defamatory notice.

The former fast bowler took to Twitter to declare that he will pursue this legal fight and that his lawyer would proceed with the case according to the law.

Shoaib commented on Twitter, “Utterly Disappointed.” “They have now given me a recovery notice after utterly failing to defend my respect and repute when I was working for PTV. I’m a fighter, and I’m not going down without a fight. Salman KNiazi, my lawyer, will handle things according to the law.”

Also Read: Shoaib Akhtar resigned from PTV Sports in live cricket transmission

In the aftermath of his on-air fight with anchor Dr Nauman Niaz on a television broadcast, Pakistan Television Corporation (PTV) issued a Rs100 million defamation notice to national hero and cricketing legend Shoaib Akhtar.

In a note obtained by a local news, the national television management said that Shoaib Akhtar quit on broadcast from PTV Sports on October 26, claiming that this was not only a breach of the clause but also caused in significant financial losses for PTV.

Read More: Pakistan defeats Scotland and remains undefeated

“As per article 22, both parties have the right to cancel his agreement by giving three months’ written notice or paying a fee in lieu of notice. PTV has suffered significant financial damages as a result of Shoaib Akhtar’s resignation on broadcast on October 26,” according to the legal notification.

“Shoaib Akhtar also departed Dubai for the T20 World Cup telecast without informing PTVC management,” it continues. In addition, PTV suffered catastrophic losses as a result of its participation on an Indian TV show featuring Indian batsman Harbhajan Singh.”

PTVC has requested that the national hero pay Rs100 million in damages as well as Rs33,33,000, the equal of a three-month salary, in the defamation notice; else, PTC retains the right to take legal action against Akhtar in a competent jurisdiction.