Islamabad:
The Supreme Court annulled a circular of the Sindh government that denied the right of pension to a daughter who divorced after the death of her pensioner father.
“We find that the circular, which imposes restrictions not supported by law or rules, is void ab initio, unconstitutional and without any legal effect. The moment of the death of the pensioner cannot be legally used to extinguish the right of a surviving daughter to claim the pension,” says the 10 -page trial authorized by Ayesha Malik, as the court, the court dismissed of the appeal of the appeal of the government of the government.
A Division Bank of the Apex Court, led by Judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar, stressed that the timely payment of the pension was not simply an administrative measure but a constitutional obligation.
“It is deeply worrying that the admissibility of the pension to a surviving daughter continues to depend completely on her marital status. This dependency model reveals that there is a systematic bias that treats a daughter as a dependent, with her financial dependence by changing the parents to her spouse.”
“This assumption not only perpetuates the stereotyped mentality about women who are dependent members within the family structure, but also recognize women as individuals or autonomous people who may have the ability to be financially independent. That married may also have that the fact that the fact that they can also have the case housing can also do so.
“It reflects a systematic bias that does not recognize women as autonomous right holders and does not explain the lived realities of women. It implies, first, that all women depend financially within the traditional family unit, from parents to the husband, and secondly, that Perse marriage ensures financial stability.”
The Apex Court also observed that the measure totally ignored the difficulties and insecurities faced by married women who may need financial security in the form of a pension, and added that dependency is not a metric for financial stability; Rather, it is an assumption that ignores the real economic need and the experiences of many women.
“The claim of the surviving daughters should be based on the need and individual evaluation instead of a legal framework based on patriarchal assumptions about what is believed to stereotypically constitutes dependence. This form of presumptive exclusion based only on marital status is unconstitutional, discriminatory and a violation of articles 14, 25 and 27 of the Constitution.” “
“The concept of linking the eligibility of a daughter to the family pension only to its marital status results in an unjustifiable distinction.”
Judge Ayesha Malik emphasized that women are independent, autonomous owners and must be entitled to a family pension where the financial need is established. He added that Pakistan’s obligations under international law reinforce the principle that women cannot be denied access to economic rights based only on marital status.
