LAHORE: The Lahore High Court has set aside a notification of finance department confining the family pension to the surviving spouse only and held that the refusal of pension on the basis of the impugned notification is not sustainable in the law.
The court passed this order in the petitions filed by Zahida Yasmeen and others challenging an administrative decision of the finance department confining the family pension to the surviving spouse only.
The court set aside the impugned orders and declared the same as without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The court observed that the statutory expression “family with spouse” cannot, without clear statutory authority, be reduced to mean the surviving spouse alone. Particularly, in matters relating to family pension and post-retirement benefits, a beneficial interpretation ought to be preferred, provided it remains consistent with the language, scheme and legislative intent of the governing statute, the court added.
The court said it constitutes a legally regulated entitlement earned through service rendered under the governing law. The court observed that subordinate legislation may supplement the parent statute but cannot supplant it. The court said that it is, therefore, necessary to distinguish between an administrative clarification and a formal amendment to statutory rules. A clarification cannot amend the rules or introduce a condition not contemplated therein, the court added.
The court said that the subordinate legislation must remain within the confines of its enabling statute is firmly settled. The court said that the impugned clarification cannot independently alter the scope of Rule 4.10, introduce a new disqualification or extinguish an entitlement contemplated by the parent Act and added such restriction travels beyond the permissible limits of delegated legislation and cannot be sustained.
The court observed that pension, where the prescribed statutory conditions stand fulfilled, is not a bounty dependent upon the discretion or benevolence of the government. The court said the constitutional and social significance of family pension also cannot be overlooked. It may constitute an important source of financial security for a surviving member of the deceased civil servant’s family, the court added. Its payment may, undoubtedly, be subjected to conditions lawfully prescribed by the competent authority, however, the executive cannot withhold, reduce or extinguish such entitlement through an instrument unsupported by the enabling legislation, the court added.
The court, therefore, directed the respective departments to reconsider and decide the respective claims of the petitioners afresh. The court said that the exercise shall be undertaken through speaking orders, after affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing, preferably within a period of 60 days.
In the event that a petitioner is found entitled to family pension, the admissible pensionary benefits, together with consequential arrears, shall be released in accordance with law, the court concluded.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026