IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 20565 of 2006 Date of Decision: March 28, 2008 Deepa Rani Sharma …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Surinder Mohan Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mrs. Mamta Singhal Talwar, AAG, Haryana, for the respondents. M.M. KUMAR, J. The petitioner has prayed for quashing order dated 21.4.2006 (P-2), directing her to pay back a sum of Rs. 1,500/-, paid to her as unemployment allowance w.e.f. November 2005 to March 2006. The recovery is sought to be effected on account of non- renewal of her name with the employment exchange as on 1.11.2005. A further direction has been sought to the respondents to pay her unemployment allowance w.e.f. April 2006 till date in accordance with the policy dated 17.11.2005. The State of Haryana has come up with a policy of C.W.P. No. 20565 of 2006 granting unemployment allowance for the educated unemployed. The policy has been given effect from 1.11.2005. A person who has remained on the rolls of employment exchange for a period of three years and is at least 10+2 qualified, is entitled to unemployment allowance provided he/she has renewed his/her name by keeping it alive on the register of employment exchange on 1st November of each year. It is admitted position that the petitioner was registered with the District Employment Exchange, Ambala City, on 18.10.2002 and has qualification of 10+2. According to the registration certificate issued to her on 18.10.2002, the next registration was required to be renewed in October 2005, with a further stipulation that one month grace period of November 2005 was given. The petitioner had completed three years and applied for renewal on 10.11.2005 (R-1). Her name was brought from dead register to live register on 11.11.2005. She was admittedly granted unemployment allowance in terms of the policy dated 17.11.2005 from November 2005 to March 2006. The payment of allowance was abruptly stopped and recovery proceedings have been initiated against her, vide orders dated 21.4.2006 and 23.8.2006 respectively (P-2 and P-3). The basis of recovery proceedings is that the petitioner was required to be on the live register on 1.11.2005 and she applied for renewal only on 10.11.2005. The renewal could be granted only on 11.11.2005 and, therefore, her failure to renew her registration by 1.11.2005 has been taken to be the basis for stoppage of the payment of allowance and recovery proceedings. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing 2 C.W.P. No. 20565 of 2006 the policy dated 17.11.2005, we are of the considered view that the respondents have not acted fairly and in accordance with law. The policy known as “Unemployment Allowance for the Educated Unemployed Scheme, 2005”, issued on 17.11.1005 has come into force w.e.f. 1.11.2005. Main features of the policy are that a person who has remained registered with the Employment Exchange for a period of three years and has requisite qualification of 10+2 or any other two years’ certificates/diploma courses after matric from any Board/ University recognised by the State of Haryana, was to be entitled to unemployment allowance @ Rs.300/- p.m. In respect of degree holder or above or three years certificate/diploma courses the allowance is Rs. 500/- p.m. The annual family income from all sources including that of the spouse of the applicant should not exceed Rs. 50,000/- or the family should not have residential or commercial property exceeding Rs. 10 lacs or agricultural land in excess of two hectares. The applicant should also be in the age group of 21-35 years. The spouse should not be employed and the applicant should not be self employed or dismissed from government employment. He should also not be convicted of any offence resulting into imprisonment for a period of six months or more. Clause (v) of the Scheme, which is relevant to the issue, reads as under: “v) The applicant should be registered with any Employment Exchange in the State for a minimum period of 3 years as on 1st November of each year.” A perusal of the afore-mentioned clause shows that the applicant should be registered with any employment exchange within 3 C.W.P. No. 20565 of 2006 the State for a minimum period of three years as on Ist of November of each year. It is conceded position that the petitioner was registered on 18.10.2002, as is evident from the perusal of registration certificate (P-1). The certificate further reveals that next registration would be in October, 2005 with specific indication that one month grace period of November, 2005 would also be given. Accordingly, the petitioner applied for renewal of her registration on 10.11.2005 and her registration was renewed on 11.11.2005. The policy is dated 17.11.2005. Firstly, the registration certificate dated 18.10.2002 itself grants the grace period of one month of registration and, therefore, the petitioner would be deemed to be registered w.e.f. 1.11.2005 even if she applied for renewal of registration on 10.11.2005, which was granted on 11.11.2005. Secondly, the policy itself is given effect from 1.11.2005, which has been issued on 17.11.2005. The petitioner could not by any possible method acquire knowledge that she has to apply in the month of October, itself so as to keep her name alive on the register of employment exchange. The respondents, in fact, have rightly granted her ‘unemployment allowance’ for five months commencing from November, 2005 to March, 2006. We find no reason for the respondents to initiate recovery proceedings against the petitioner by issuing notices dated 1.4.2006 and 23.8.2006 (P-2 and P-3). As a sequel to the afore-mentioned discussion, orders dated 21.4.2006 and 23.8.2006 (P-2 and P-3) are hereby set aside. The respondents are restrained from effecting any recovery from the petitioner. The respondents are further directed to pay ‘unemployment 4 C.W.P. No. 20565 of 2006 allowance’ to the petitioner in pursuance to the policy dated 17.11.2005 regularly. Arrears from April, 2006 onwards shall also be paid to her within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE (SABINA) March 28, 2008 JUDGE Pkapoor FIT FOR INDEXING 5