' Mst. Aurangzeb Bibi, widow of a martyred police official, namely, Syed Firdous Ali Shah, Deputy Superintendent of Police, has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, after being treated a rolling stone from one corner to the other, by the Government Departments, so as to get the prompt relief and justice in her entitled pension payment. The facts, in brief as unveiled by the learned counsel and narrated in the writ petition are that above noted Shaheed had left behind him two widows, one Mst. Aurangzeb Bibi, the writ petitioner and the other Mst. Safida Bibi, resident of Attock District. The PPO No. 1275/S was issued from Government treasury Attock in the name of Mst. Safida Bibi who afterward met with death issueless on 14-11- 1975. So the petitioner became the sole widow of Syed Firdous Ali Shah, deceased. She applied for the correction of PPO by issuance of full amount of widow's pension papers in her favour and for its disbursement.
As the petitioner had become the sole surviving widow and entitled to get the full pension under the Pension Rules of 1963, the petitioner applied for that purpose to the Inspector General of Police. Punjab, who forwarded the request of petitioner to Accountant General, Punjab vide Memo. No.3473 A-III dated 7-4-1994, Lahore. She also placed her grievances before the District Accounts.Officers, Multan as well as to the Attock District,, but all these efforts proved in vain. On 20-4-2004 the Government of Punjab, Finance Department issued a letter to the District Accounts Officers, Multan and to Attock District allowing the remaining full pension to the surviving widow but afterward this letter was withdrawn on 7-5-2004 without any rhyme or reason. In pursuance of that Memo. Dated 7-5-2004 District Accounts Officer, Multan refused to pay the widow's Family Pension on 11-5- 2004, hence this writ petition:
2. The widow's learned counsel has argued the case of the petitioner vehemently by stating that the petitioner is being deprived of her right, which she had got under Pension Rules of 1963. The co-widow having expired, the petitioner was entitled for the whole of pension to be delivered to her. The refusal to pay through another letter dated 7-5-2004 was without grant of right of hearing and notice to the petitioner. The withdrawal of vested right through the impugned order/memo. Was coram non judice. The petitioner being entitled to the pension, it may be granted the other half from the date 'of death of Mst. Safida Bibi by holding the impugned order to be illegal and unlawful.
3. Learned Addl. A.G. Has, supported the impugned order/memo. Referred to above dated 7-5-2004. He has argued by replying that the Finance Department/respondent No.l. Has to take the final decision, which is yet, to be taken by that Department of the Government. The District Accounts Officer Multan has also submitted the parawise comments with the sentences of "no comments".
4. After perusal of the record, comments and hearing of the learned counsel, I have come to the following conclusions, that in the report and parawise comments of respondent No.1, that "The Punjab Civil Services Pension Rules do not evidently provide restoration of full family pension to the surviving widow. It is equally true that there is no negation of the same in the rules". These words and sentences connotes that the rules have not prohibited the Government to grant full Family Pension to the surviving widow. This admission itself is sufficient for the acceptance of the writ. But I have seen it from another angle also, the. Government was to pay a fully family pension to a widow if she was a sole or there were two widows. So from the Government exchequer full family pension was to be disbursed in either case. If there are two widows, the Government has not to.Pay full pension to each Widow separately. It was the share of the sole widow, which was being distributed inter se between two widows, otherwise from the Government exchequer, the same pension was being distributed for one widow only. If one of the widows has died, the Government has to pay the full pension as it was already paying to two widows, by distributing the full into two portions. After the death of one of the widows, the other widow is not demanding more than the amount of full family pension, to which she was entitled to get but due to his co-widow, it was being distributed into two. It was the full share of a widow, which was being divided between two. Therefore; it is only a matter of correction of pension papers, and not a new payment. The price hike and the surrounding circumstances require that the widow should be accommodated as far as possible.
The Government is not to loose anything as the Governmeht was already paying/dividing one family pension between both the widows, Even rule 4.10 of the Punjab Civil Service.Pension Rules, 1963 do not prohibit the payment of whole family pension to the sole widow.
5. Even viewed through legal parlance, the widow who was once allowed to be disbursed the whole pension through Memo. No. F.D. SR-111-4-30/2004 dated 26th March, 2004 by the Finance Department, Government of the Punjab, it could not be withdrawn without grant of opportunity, of hearing and notice to her, as a vested right had created and was granted to her. In these circumstances, the subsequent Memo. No.FD-SR-III-4-30 of 2004 .Dated 7-5-2004' is held illegal and unlawful.
6. The elongation of the process of the sanction of disbursement of the whole family pension have already consumed a lot of time. It would be a grave injustice to throw the widow again at the mercy of departments and to their shenanigans, so as to deprive a widow from its right of pension.
7, I may add and remind the Government of its duty to maintain the widows in an Islamic State, especially of those widows, which are of the servants of. The State who had presented their lives while serving the State, in fact the Nation.
8. So I accept, this writ petition,' declare the impugned order dated 7-5-2004 to be illegal and un-lawful, and direct the respondents to pay the whole family pension of the widow from the date of death of B Mst. Safida Bibi i.e. 14-11-1975 till today and in future, till the death of the petitioner, remarriage or uptill the law permits. With these - observations and directions, the writ is disposed of without any order as to costs.