Qudrat Ullah v. Additional District Judge, Renala Khurd District Okara, etc. (Regarding whether “maintenance of child includes educational expenses?”)

Case Title: Qudrat Ullah v. Additional District Judge, Renala Khurd District Okara, etc.

Case Citation: 2024 SCP 55

Court: The Supreme Court of Pakistan

Parties: Qudrat Ullah (Petitioner)

Additional District Judge, Renala Khurd District Okara, Respondent No.3, Respondent No.4 (Respondents)

Judges: Mr. Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Mr. Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi

Facts of the Case: The petitioner contends through this appeal that Rs. 25,000/- monthly maintenance for Respondent No. 4 (his daughter) from his previous marriage to Respondent No. 3 (his ex-wife) is not reasonable. His writ petition previously being dismissed by the Lahore High court, he contends that his only source of income is his pension of Rs. 60,000/- per month and due to expenses of his family from current second marriage, the maintenance amount is not justified. His ex-wife on the other hand contends that the amount is necessary for their daughter’s continuation of studies who is currently halfway through university.

Issues: The main issue in this judgement is “Whether a Muslim father is under an obligation to pay the expenses incurred on the education of his daughter/children?” or “Whether maintenance of child includes educational expenses?”

Issues Addressed: The Muslim Family Law Ordinance of 1961 in Pakistan fails to define the word ‘maintenance’ or its scope hence the court started by interpreting the dictionary meaning and its interpretation in Shariah. The court replied on Section 369 of the Principles of Muhammadan Law by D.D. Mulla and said other than food and lodging, the specific word ‘including’ did not exclude other expenses for physical and mental wellbeing. The court also analyzed maintenance in Islamic law and relied upon Surah Al-Baqarah and Surah An-Nisa, the latter of which stated “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women because God has given the one more (strength) than the other and because they support them from their means.” This ultimately established the principle that right of child to be maintained by the father is ordained by Islamic law. Furthermore, the obligations of fulfilling rights towards children was pointed out by the honorable court to be an erga omnes in international law following the UNCRC and Pakistan’s complete ratification to it in 1997. The Court, after reading and referencing Article 27 of the UNCRC with Article 3(1), laid down that the best interests of a child will be the utmost priority in the decision for him and that all states are under an obligation to recognize the right of every child to a standard of living adequate for the child’s moral and social development. Hence it is in the best interest of Respondent No. 3 to have access to quality education and in general, education to a level where she can reasonably have a degree after which she can find a job and earn her own living. And to reach that sufficient education level she requires the amount contested by the petitioner. It was also addressed that the petitioner has other sources of income besides his pension that are sufficient and has the ability to pay the required educational expenses. 

Court Held: The court upheld the judgement of the appellate and High court and concluded that the sum of Rs. 25,000/- was required to ensure the continuation of the studies of Respondent No. 4 and it is not excessive nor unjustified. Hence the petition being devoid of merit was dismissed.