MADHU SUDAN MITTAL Vs. JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner brought to our notice that this Court passed order on 17-5-2010 which required something to be done by the respondent Board. On 27-8-2010, Advocate General sought for time to comply with the order passed by this Court and three weeks' time was granted. LEARNED Advocate General informs that they have filed the reply. On being questioned whether the entire direction has been complied with, he is not in a position to say that the entire direction passed on 17-10-2010 has been complied with. The scheme which was to come up, has not come up yet. The same may be finalized before the next date of hearing

(3.) PER contra, Mr. V. P. Singh, learned counsel for the Board submitted as follows : When this State was separated, it had got very dilapidated condition. The Electricity Board came into function since 1st of May, 2001 and thereafter there were certain difficulties. There were no regular Heads so far as Electricity Board is concerned. The Electricity Board is manned by the Senior I.A.S. Officers for the last three months. So far as the topography of the State of Jharkhand is concerned, so many lines passes through forest area and thundering prone area. The power supply sometimes is interrupted by the thundering and supply has to be closed and if it is connected with the generating station, the generating station will be damaged and that will be a very difficult situation. These were the backgrounds.