SC issues landmark ruling on pension rights for divorced daughters

ISLAMABAD: In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has ruled that a divorced daughter is entitled to her deceased father’s pension, regardless of her marital status at the time of his death, ARY News reported.

The court declared that pension is a legal right, not charity, and must be given based on entitlement, not marital condition.

The 10-page written judgment, authored by Justice Ayesha Malik, stated that the timing of the divorce, whether before or after the father’s death, is irrelevant to a daughter’s eligibility for pension.

The ruling emphasised that women’s right to pension should not be based on financial need or marriage status, but rather on equality and entitlement.

The Supreme Court of Pakistan struck down the 2022 circular issued by the Sindh government that denied pension to daughters divorced after their father’s death.

The apex court called the circular discriminatory, unconstitutional, and a violation of fundamental rights under Articles 9, 14, 25, and 27 of the Constitution.

The judgement noted with concern that Pakistan ranks 148 out of 148 countries on the Global Gender Gap Index and stated that continued denial of rights to women.

The case was brought by a divorced woman who had requested reinstatement of her late father’s pension.

Her plea was accepted by the Larkana Bench of the Sindh High Court, which ordered resumption of her pension.

Also Read: Federal Shariat Court rules against depriving women of inheritance in Pakistan

The Sindh government challenged the decision in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, arguing that pension eligibility applies only to daughters divorced prior to the father’s death.

The Supreme Court rejected the Sindh government’s appeal and upheld the High Court’s ruling, reiterating that pension is a constitutional and legal right, and any delay in its disbursement is a punishable offence.

The court further remarked that circulars cannot override or reinterpret the law, and that treating women as financially dependent by default contradicts constitutional principles of equality and dignity.