Islamabad:
The Supreme Court has turned down a Sindh government circular that refused the pension right of a daughter who was divorced after the death of his retirement father.
“We find out that the circular imposing restrictions not supported by the law or rules is invalid AB Initio, constitutional and without legal effect. The time of the pensioner’s death cannot legally be used to turn off a surviving daughter’s right to demand pension,” reads the 10-page judgment written by Justice Ayesha Malik as the court reigned.
A division bench of the point of point, led by justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, emphasized that the timely payment of pension was not only an administrative measure, but a constitutional obligation.
“It is deeply about the fact that the assumption of retirement for a surviving daughter continues to depend on her marital status. This model of addiction reveals that there is a systematic bias that treats a daughter as a dependent, with her financial addiction changing from parent to spouse.”
“This assumption not only forces the stereotypical mindset that women are addicted members of the family structure, but also fails to recognize women as individuals or autonomous persons who may have the capacity to be financially independent. It is also based on the lack of belief that married women are also divorced.”
“It reflects a systematic bias that does not recognize women as autonomous right-wing holders nor take into account the women’s lived realities. It assumes, first and foremost, that all women are financially dependent on the traditional family unit-from parents of male and and for the second, it ensures marriage in itself economic stability.”
The Apex Court further noted that the move completely ignored the difficulties and uncertainties facing married women who may need financial security in the form of a pension, adding that dependence is not a metric for financial stability; Rather, it is an assumption that one ignores the actual financial needs and many women’s lived experiences.
“The claim of surviving daughters must be based on needs and individual assessment rather than a legal framework built on patriarchal assumptions about what stereotypically assumed to be addiction. This kind of presumed exclusion based solely on marital status is constitutional, discriminatory and a violation of Articles 14, 25 and 27 of the Authority.”
“The concept of tying a daughter’s eligibility to family pension solely to her marital status results in an unjustified distinction.”
Justice Ayesha Malik emphasized that women are independent right -wing holders, autonomous and should be entitled to a family pension where the financial needs are established. She added that Pakistan’s obligations under international law strengthen the principle that women cannot be denied access to financial rights based on marital status alone.
