JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Being aggrieved by the decision of the learned Single Judge, the State of Jharkhand is in appeal. By the impugned judgment dated 12.04.2018 passed in W.P.(S) No. 3204 of 2013, the penalty order of dismissal from service dated 23.10.2007 inflicted upon the husband of the writ petitioner, ex parte and the appellate order dated 14.03.2013 affirming the same were quashed. The writ petitioner was held entitled to the benefits of family pension and other post-retirement benefits with a rider that it shall not be paid to the writ petitioner for the next two years and if mother of the deceased employee appears, the amount shall be distributed amongst the legal heirs in terms of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The learned Single Judge also directed the respondent State to decide the claim for compassionate appointment of the writ petitioner within 3 months. Husband of the writ petitioner namely Bharat Dharti Thapa had died on 19.11.2007 in rather strange circumstances during his period of absence at a place called Medak in Andhra Pradesh.

3. Relevant material facts borne from record indicate that husband of the writ petitioner was a constable in Jharkhand Armed Police (JAP)-I. He had absented from duty from 08.03.2007 without information or leave. He was proceeded against for the charge of willful unauthorized absence from duty. Notices sent on his permanent address remained undelivered due to his absence since no other person was available to receive it. The proceeding ended ex parte with the order of his dismissal from service.

4. Writ petitioner preferred an appeal against the order of dismissal from service under Rule 851 of the Jharkhand Police Manual on 14.12.2012. The appeal was accompanied with application for condonation of delay. In the application for condonation of delay, the writ petitioner took ground that she had filed the writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 2730 of 2009 before this Court for grant of compassionate appointment and payment of death cum retirement dues. However, during pendency of the writ petition she was advised by her new counsel that order of dismissal needs to be challenged in appeal. On account of ignorance, the appeal could not filed within prescribed time of 6 months but could be filed on 08.12.2012 only with sufficient explanation for delay. There was no laches or negligence on her part. In the appeal the writ petitioner had inter alia taken the following grounds:

I. That the disciplinary proceeding has been concluded ex parte without hearing the delinquent employee or the writ petitioner;

II. the employee was suffering from retardation of mind;

III. termination order was passed on 23.10.2007 and on 19.11.2007 office was informed about his death in Medak, Andhara Pradesh;

IV. the inquiry proceeding was concluded in haste without service of notice; within 7 months of his absence he was dismissed from service, though there were no willful absence rather he was suffering from mental retardation;

V. the writ petitioner also urged that she was only 29 years old and has a son aged 7 years with no bread earner in the family. The mother of the employee was nominated for provident fund. But she was settled in Nepal and she had never come to receive her legal dues;

VI. the F.I.R lodged by Medak Police revealed that the deceased was suspected of suffering from some mental disease.

5. The appellate authority Director General of Police, JAP, Ranchi dismissed the appeal by order dated 14.03.2013 holding that during inquiry proceeding, no such proof of medical illness or any serious disease was produced by the delinquent or on his behalf. Findings were recorded on the basis of materials produced by the Presenting Officer. Employee was not married since in his service book the name of his father, mother and sister were recorded and not of the appellant/writ petitioner. Since the delinquent employee was absconder, notices were sent on his home address by a specia