WP(C) 2104/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 14.5.2010 Mr. R. Dubey, learned co unsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is dissatisfied due to the failure of the police to recover her husband Sri Satender Singh, an employee und er the TRIFED who is missing since 25.2.2009 and that the petitioner is keen tha t the Court continue to monitor the police investigation of the case. This court on perusal of the status report filed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Guwahati (City) earlier recorded that the investigation made so far doe s not suggest any lack of sincerity or purpose of the investigation of the case which is being supervised by the Sr Superintendent of Police. However, the missi ng person’s whereabout is yet to be found. Considering the assessment so made, this court does not find any justification t o continue to monitor the investigation of the Chandmari P.S. Case No.97/2009. I n view of the conclusion reached by the court I am disinclined to hand over the investigation to the CBI as sought by the petitioner. Accordingly, the case is disposed of with the direction to the police authority and particularly the Senior Superintendent of Police, Guwahati (City) to keep th eir efforts on to trace out the missing husband of the petitioner, till a conclu sion is reached in the matter. However, notwithstanding the disposal of the case, it is made clear that if any arrear wages on account of the service rendered by the missing husband of the pe titioner remains unpaid, steps be taken to make the due payment to the wife expe ditiously. Until payment is made or no payment is found to be due, the payment b y way of monthly installment shall continue as is being paid now. Mr S Bharali, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.7 and 8 has taken note of t he order passed by this court.