Order On 9.1.2008, this Court had given five directions. The first direction relates to supply of additional 150 MW electricity by DVC to JSEB. Now J.S.E.B. has filed an affidavit stating therein that DVC is not supplying power to the tune of 150 MW to J.S.E.B. as per the agreement and as per the direction given by this Court. 2. As a matter of fact, on 9.1.2008 this Court had given a positive direction to J.S.E.B. to ensure that it gets additional 150 MW electricity from DVC and DVC to see that the agreed 150 MW of electricity is supplied to J.S.E.B. Before giving this direction, this Court had heard the Advocate General and the Advocate General also had assured this Court that he would see that 150 MW of electricity is supplied to J.S.E.B. But unfortunately it is now noticed from the affidavit filed by "J.S.E.B. that DVC is not complying with the order passed by this Court, even though J.S.E.B. by its letter dated 14.1.2008, reminded DVC about the direction given by this Court on 9.1.2008. It is also requested by J.S.E.B. to DVC in the said letter that 150 MW of electricity may kindly be made available to J.S.E.B. immediately for strict compliance of the order of the High Court in letter and spirit. But according to the counsel appearing for J.S.E.B. there is no response to this letter by D.V.C. and there is no compliance of the direction given by this Court by D.V.C. 3. Advocate General, who appears for D.V.C. also, is unable to offer any explanation for the same. There is one another counsel appearing for D.V.C. and he is also keeping mum. Therefore, there is no explanation offered by D.V.C. for non-compliance of the order passed by this Court on 9.1.2008. 4. Under those circumstances, the Director (Commercial), Damodar Valley Corporation, Commercial Department, DVC Towers, VIP Road. Kolkata, to whom the letter was addressed by J.S.E.B. is directed to be present before this Court on 5.2.2008 to explain as to why the order passed by this Court on 9.1.2008 has not been complied with. 5. There is yet another direction to the Central Government for supply of 267 MW of electricity to J.S.E.B. as agreed earlier. The said direction reads as follows:- "J.S.E.B. should ensure that it gets 267 MW of electricity from the Central Sector as agreed earlier. 5. There is yet another direction to the Central Government for supply of 267 MW of electricity to J.S.E.B. as agreed earlier. The said direction reads as follows:- "J.S.E.B. should ensure that it gets 267 MW of electricity from the Central Sector as agreed earlier. It is quite unfortunate that though this Court, by the order dated 3.12.2007, directed the Central Government Counsel to see and ensure that the agreed energy of 267 MW is supplied to J.S.E.B. without any delay, the same is not supplied. Therefore, this Court is constrained to reiterate and direct the Central Government afresh to see that the agreed 267 MW of electricity is supplied to J.S.E.B. If any violation to this direction is made, it will be viewed seriously." 6. Perusal of this direction would indicate that this Court on noticing that the agreed electricity of 267 MW is not supplied from the Central Sector to J.S.E.B regularly, expressed its displeasure over the conduct of the Central Government for not supplying the agreed quantity of electricity to J.S.E.B. even though order was passed by this Court on 3.12.2007 to the Central Government Counsel, Mr. Mokhtar Khan, to see and ensure that the Agreed energy of 267 MW is supplied to J.S.E.B. without any delay. The Chief Minister representing the State Government had written letter to the Central Government for supply of more electricity. Therefore, this Court gave a specific direction to the Central Government afresh to see that the agreed 267 MW of electricity is supplied to J.S.E.B. It was also specifically directed that if any violation to this direction is made, it will be viewed seriously. 7. Now an affidavit has been filed by the Central Government through the Under-Secretary, Ministry of Power, Government of India, giving no reason for non supply of the agreed electricity to J.S.E.B. as per the aforesaid order of this Court. Mr. Mokhtar Khan, counsel appearing for the Central Government, who was present earlier and to whom specific direction was given to see and ensure that the agreed energy of 267 MW is supplied to J.S.E.B. without any delay, is also not present today. However, his junior is present and represented the Central Government. He pointed out that an affidavit has been filed by the Central Government. However, his junior is present and represented the Central Government. He pointed out that an affidavit has been filed by the Central Government. The affidavit filed by the Central Government does not give any explanation as to why the said direction given by this Court has not been complied with. 8. Under the above circumstances, we think it fit to summon the Secretary, Ministry of Power, Government of India, New Delhi to appear before this Court on 5.2.2008 to explain as to why the second direction given by this Court on 9.1.2008 has not been complied with. 9. In the third direction, we had directed the Jharkhand State Regulatory Commission to publish notice in the newspapers inviting other licensees to apply for supply of electricity in the town of Ranchi without there being any objection from the side of J.S.E.B. 10. Now an affidavit has been filed by the Jharkhand State Regulatory Commission to the effect that the Commission has published the notice in all newspapers of Jharkhand and National editions. In paragraph 4 thereof, it is stated that once the applications from the interested licensees are received, the distribution license for supply of electricity would be granted by the Commission as per the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Regulations made there under. This statement is recorded. 11. As regards the request by the JSEB for modification of the direction given in the third direction with reference to objection from the side of J.S.E.B. it is to be stated that the said direction need not be modified, in view of the aforesaid statement made by the Regulatory Commission. 12. Post this case on 5.2.2008 for their appearance. 13. Advocate General at this stage would submit that he would see that the direction given by this Court to D.V.C. is complied with on or before 31.1.2008. He also requests this Court to dispense with the presence of the Officer of D.V.C. on 5.2.2008, if the order of this Court directing the D.V.C. to supply electricity is complied with in the meantime. Accordingly if the direction of this Court to D.V.C. is complied with, the Officer of the D.V.C. need not appear before this Court. 14. Let copies of this order be given to the counsel appearing for the parties.