D VENKATARAO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, who are father and wife respectively of Shri D. Kaleshwar Rao, have filed this petition for directing the respondents to produce the person of Shri D. Kaleshwar Ra o

(2.) SHIR D. Kaleshwa Rao was in service with South Eastern Railway, headed by respondent No4. On dated 3-8-1982 he was deputed for refresher course training by the Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer, an officer under respondent No5 at the South Eastern Railway Electrical Staff Training School at Rourkela in the State of Orissa. D. Kaleshwar Rao proceeded from Nagpur for training and joined under respondent No6 on 7-8-1982. During the training period D. Kaleshwar Rao was residing at the hostel of South Eastern Railway Electrical Staff Training School. It is alleged that he was in custody of respondent Nos. 4 to 6. On dated 27-8-1982 the petitioner Nol received a telegram from South Eastern Railway Authorities informing that D. Kaleshwar Rao had become ill and he attended the South Eastern Railway Health Unit, Rourkela, at 9. 30 hours, returned to the hostel at 10. 30 hours and further that he went out from the hostel and did not return till 16. 00 hours to the school or hostel. The petitioner Nd immediately rushed to the training center at Rourkela on 28-8-82 and met respondent No 6 Principal. The petitioner Nol contacted D. S. P. (Civil) Incharge of Steel City, Police Station, Rourkela and City Magistrate and complained to them regarding absence of his son, D. Kaleshwar Rao It is alleged that the authorities and respondents did not take any steps to trace out D. Kaleshwar Rao inspite of number of representations and requests to all concerned authorities, and the respondents have not even informed the petitioners as to whether D. Kaleshwar Rao is still alive or his where abouts.

(3.) THE petitioners amended the petition and added respondent No7. The Inspector General of Police Cuttack, State of Orissa, as per Court's order dated 3-2-1987. Respondent No3 Director General, Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi, filed affidavit and stated that function of Central Bureau of Investigation is normally to enforce the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act and incidental offence. It is the Contention of respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6 that the authorities took necessary steps immediately. Respondent No6 sent telegram on 26-8-82 to Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer, S. E. Railway, Nagpur and other authorities. He has lodged a report to Officer Commanding, Government Railway Police at Rourkela and also reported to the Town Police Station, Rourkela. The respondents have also reported the matter to Addi. District Magistrate, Rourkela. They also written a letter to the Station Director All India Radio, Sambalpur, on 4-9-1982 for making an announcement in English, Oriya and Hindi about the missing of Shri D. Kaleshwar Rao and such an announcement was made by All India Radio, Sambalpur. It is stated that respondentt gave all help and co-operation to petitioner No 1 when he visited Rourkela on 28-8-1982. The printed pamphlets with photo of D. Kaleshwar Rao were also pasted on Railway Coaches and public places in sorroundings and distributed in the adjacent localities by the school staff. Similarly, printed notices with photo of D. Kaleshwar Rao were displayed in different offices like Government Railway Police Station and other offices of Railways. It is the contention of respondents that they took all possible steps for tracing the person of D. Kaleshwar Rao