ORDER The petitioner, widow of a deceased State Government employee (late Jagdish Singh) has filed this writ petition for a direction on the respondents to provide her with all the consequential benefits that were due to the husband of the petitioner (late Jagdish Singh), including the arrears of pay, post-death benefits like family pension, G.P.F. amount, group insurance amount, gratuity etc. with further prayer to direct the respondents to appoint her son on compassionate ground. 2. The husband of the petitioner, late Jagdish Singh was appointed as a Police Constable on 26th of August, 1961 under the respondent-State, bearing Constable No. 122. According to the petitioner, during the service period of said Jagdish Singh no adverse remark was communicated. It was because of mental disturbances the husband of the petitioner, Jagdish Singh left the duty on 16th of May, 1983 and also left the house. He was ultimately traced by the son of the petitioner, namely, Ashok Kumar Singh. Late Jagdish Singh was treated by the Mental Doctors, including Dr. S.A. Hasib, retired Superintendent of Mental Hospital, Ranchi. Subsequently said Jagdish Singh was suspended on 16th of May, 1983 being absent from duty. 3. It is stated that after the treatment of said Jagdish Singh, he joined the duty again in the year 1984, but became mentally disabled again in the month of December, 1984. It is then the Home Police Department of the State of Bihar, took into notice that Jagdish Singh was mentally ill and so he was sent to Mental Hospital, Kanke, Ranchi for treatment. It is for the said reason the suspension order was revoked, and when Jagdish Singh recovered from mental illness, was allowed to join the duty in February, 1985. He was also transferred to Hazaribagh and then again to Bhagalpur, where Jagdish Singh was earlier posted. According to the petitioner, her husband, Jagdish Singh was paid salary up to December, 1985 and again from March, 1986. But in the years 1986 again said Jagdish Singh suffered from mental disability. 4. In the meantime, a departmental proceeding No. 19/84 was initiated against said Jagdish Singh for his absence from duty, but according to the petitioner, the charge-sheet was not served on said Jagdish Singh. But in the years 1986 again said Jagdish Singh suffered from mental disability. 4. In the meantime, a departmental proceeding No. 19/84 was initiated against said Jagdish Singh for his absence from duty, but according to the petitioner, the charge-sheet was not served on said Jagdish Singh. Jagdish Singh having come to know of the same represented with a request to supply him copy of the charge-sheet by representation dated 10th of April, 1986 (Annexure-3), but without following the procedures of law, said Jagdish Singh was dismissed from service by one order dated 27th of March, 1988, as contained in Annexure-5 with retrospective date of 16th of May, 1983. Being aggrieved said Jagdish Singh filed appeal petition before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bhagalpur East Area, Bhagalpur, which appeal was allowed by one order dated 3rd of June, 1989, as contained in Annexure-6. It will be evident from the appellate order dated 3rd of June, 1989 (Annexure-6) that the dismissal order, which was passed against the said late Jagdish Singh, as contained in Annexure-5 was declared to be illegal by the appellate authority and the matter was remitted for re-enquiry by the enquiry officer. Thereafter no further enquiry was conducted by the respondents, and in the meantime, Jagdish Singh, the husband of the petitioner, died on 20th of June, 1992. 5. The petitioner earlier moved before this Court by filing a writ petition C.W.J.C. No. 8277 of 1992, when by order dated 20th of November, 1992 (Annexure-8), a Bench of this Court taking into note that fresh enquiry was ordered, directed the respondents to dispose of the matter in the light of the direction given by the higher authority. Thereafter the respondents have come out with one order dated 21st of July, 1993 (Annexure-9), by which while disposing of the matter relating to departmental proceeding against late Jagdish Singh, the period from 16th of May, 1983 to 19th of June, 1992 has been treated to be in service with respect to said Jagdish Singh and since 20th of June, 1992, the day when Jagdish Singh has been treated to be compulsorily retired from service. 6. A formal order to that effect has been issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Eastern Range, Bhagalpur vide memo dated 31st of July, 1993 enclosed with Annexure-9. 7. 6. A formal order to that effect has been issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Eastern Range, Bhagalpur vide memo dated 31st of July, 1993 enclosed with Annexure-9. 7. Though the case was filed as back as on 21st of January, 1994, by serving copies of the writ petition on the counsel for the State, but in spite of the fact that for about one and half years has been passed, no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. The factual aspect as mentioned by the petitioner has not been denied by the respondents. 8. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that after declaration of earlier order of dismissal, as contained in Annexure-5 as illegal by the appellate authority, and the appellate authority having ordered for re-enquiry with respect to Jagdish Singh having died, in the eye of law the departmental enquiry automatically stood closed and said Jagdish Singh is to be treated to have been died while in service. Thereby the last portion of the order dated 13th of July, 1993 (Annexure-9) read with order, contained in Memo No. 724 dated 21st of July, 1993, by which it has been ordered to treat late Jagdish Singh to be compulsorily retired from service with effect from 20th of June, 1992, has been challenged by the petitioner. 9. Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submitted that in spite of various reminders made to the department, no instruction has been received by her. So far as the legality of last portion of the order dated 13th of July, 1993 (Annexure-9), compulsorily retiring said Jagdish Singh with effect from 20th of June, 1992 is concerned, the counsel for the State is not in a position to support the same. 10. Having heard the parties, I feel that the last portion of the order dated 13th of July, 1993 (Annexure-9) treating Jagdish Singh to have been compulsorily retired from service with effect from 19th and/or 20th of June, 1992 is completely illegal. 10. Having heard the parties, I feel that the last portion of the order dated 13th of July, 1993 (Annexure-9) treating Jagdish Singh to have been compulsorily retired from service with effect from 19th and/or 20th of June, 1992 is completely illegal. The earlier order of dismissal, as contained in Annexure-5 having been declared illegal by the appellate authority by order dated 3rd of June, 1989 (Annexure-6) and re-enquiry having been ordered against Jagdish Singh, and particularly when the respondents are accepting that the period from 16th of May, 1983 to 19th of June, 1992, Jagdish Singh should be treated to be in service, the respondents cannot treat him (Jagdish Singh) to have been compulsorily retired from service with effect from 20th of June, 1993, on the said date the departmental enquiry having not been concluded and having stood closed by virtue of death of Jagdish Singh. 11. For the reasons stated above, I hold that the husband of the petitioner, late Jagdish Singh died on 20th of June, 1992, while he was in service of the respondent-State and thereby the last portion of the order dated 13th of July, 1993 (Annexure-9) treating the said Jagdish Singh to have been compulsorily retired from service with effect from 20th of June, 1992, is set aside. 12. In the result, the respondents are directed to provide the petitioner, widow of late Jagdish Singh with the following benefits :- (a) Arrears of salary whatever that was due to late Jagdish Singh for the period from 16th of May, 1983 to 19th of June, 1992, in accordance with law; (b) to pay the petitioner immediately the post-death benefits, which includes family pension, gratuity, G.P.F. amount, group insurance amount etc. as is due in accordance with law; and (c) The petitioner be also paid simple interest on the aforesaid amount at the rate of 12 percent which should be calculated from 20th of June, 1992, till the date the same be paid in favour of the petitioner, So far as the compassionate appointment of the son of the petitioner is concerned, taking into note that it is because of the delay on the part of the respondents and incorrect decision on their part, the son of the petitioner could not apply for compassionate appointment. I allow the petitioner and/or her son, anyone of them, whoever is eligible, to apply for compassionate appointment against a suitable post. If such application for compassionate appointment is made within a period of two months from today, the respondents are directed to decide the same in accordance with law. 13. So far as the direction that has been given in the preceding paragraph relating to payment of arrears of salary and post-death benefits are concerned, the same must be paid in favour of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 14. The writ petition is allowed with the aforementioned order and direction.