ORDER : Y.K. Sabharwal and D.M. Dharmadhikari, JJ. We have perused the affidavit dated 6-9-2004 filed by Dr. Rajesh Gopal, Inspector General of Forests and Director, Project Tiger, Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests. The State Governments were granted opportunity to respond to the said affidavit. Except the State of Madhya Pradesh and the State of Rajasthan, no other State has responded. 2. Insofar as the State of Madhya Pradesh is concerned, the learned counsel representing that State submits that since the amounts are allocated by the Central Government, the State Government is bound to follow the directives/suggestions of the Central Government. 3. Para 4 of the affidavit states that if the directions mentioned therein are strictly adhered to, it would be possible that the purpose for which the funds are allocated would be properly utilised and in time. However, while mentioning those directives, no time-frame has been stipulated. For example, Direction (B) in Para 4 stipulates the release of funds by the Central Government in two instalments with a view to ensure that the user agencies get the money in time to utilise the same. When those instalments would be released has not been indicated. It may be noted that the direction is in the context of the grievance that the amounts were being released at the fag end of the year leaving hardly any time for the user agencies to utilise the funds. Further, no time-frame for submission of utilisation certificate by the State Governments to the Central Government has been indicated. 4. The affidavit, in Para 7, also makes a mention of constitution of an Expert Committee for annual monitoring and evaluation of Project Tiger. The said Committee was constituted in terms of the Order issued by the MoEF on 15-7-2004. The learned Additional Solicitor General, however, is not in a position to assist the Court as to whether the Committee, in the last four months, has undertaken any work or not and further whether any NGO is a member of the said Expert Committee or not. We direct a further affidavit to be filed by the Central Government within three weeks giving full details. 5. This order should not be understood to give licence to anyone not to implement the directives as suggested in Para 4 of the affidavit of Dr. Rajesh Gopal. 6. List the matter after three weeks. 7. Having heard Mr. We direct a further affidavit to be filed by the Central Government within three weeks giving full details. 5. This order should not be understood to give licence to anyone not to implement the directives as suggested in Para 4 of the affidavit of Dr. Rajesh Gopal. 6. List the matter after three weeks. 7. Having heard Mr. Raheja, petitioner-in-person, and on perusal of his letter dated 10-9-2004, addressed to the Registry of this Court, we direct that the matter regarding the road to be constructed through Corbett Tiger Reserve and the issue between the Union of India, the States of Uttaranchal and Uttar Pradesh, subject-matter of IAs Nos. 2-6, shall be separately listed. 8. The said IAs be listed after four weeks.