PRIYANKA JAIN vs PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR

Judgment text excerpt

$~72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 11178/2023 & CM APPL. 43441/2023 PRIYANKA JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Dr. L.S Chaudhary with Dr. Ajay Chaudhary, Mr. Bharat Chaudhary, Ms. Vinita, Monika, Mr. Anirudh Sharma and Mr. Vishesh Kumar, Advs. versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rajat Arora, Mr. Niraj Kumar and Mr. Sourabh Mahala, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 17.07.2025 C.HARI SHANKAR, J. The lis 1. This writ petition assails the constitutional validity of Regulation 2(o)(c) of the Punjab National Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 19951, “so far as it restricts the benefit of family pension to a deceased employee’s daughter, on completing the age of 25 years”. The provision reads thus: “2. Definitions: 1 “the Pension Regulations”, hereinafter W.P.(C) 11178/2023 Signature Not Verified Page 1 of 37 Digitally Signed By:AJIT KUMAR Signing Date:21.07.2025 12:51:58 In these regulations, unless the context otherwise requires :- ***** (o) “family” in relation to an employee means :- ***** c) son or daughter including widow or divorced daughter till he or she attains the age of twenty five years or up to his or her marriage or re-marriage, whichever is earlier including such son or daughter adopted legally. 2. Regulation 2(o)(c) is only a definition clause. It merely defines expressions used in the Pension Regulations. While, classically, a definition clause has no independent substantive operational existence, and becomes meaningful only when it is employed to understand the expression as it occurs in one or the other provision as contained in that statutory, or quasi-statutory instrument, nonetheless, if the definition of an expression, as contained in the