JUDGMENT : 1. This civil revision under section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order of the District Judge, Jabalpur, passed on 17-11-1966 in M. J. C. No. 31 of 1966. 2. The applicant made an application to the District Judge stating that the non-applicant, the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, while exercising its statutory powers of laying a transmission line in pursuance to a sanctioned scheme has damaged his property for which he is entitled to compensation. He prayed that the same may be determined under section 16 (3) of the Telegraph Act read with section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act. On a preliminary objection raised by the Board, the learned District Judge has held that he has no jurisdiction to entertain the application as, in his opinion, section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act does not bring into play section 16 (3) of the Telegraph Act and the remedy, if any, in such a case is by a civil suit. 3. Kumari P. Surey, the learned counsel for the applicant contends that section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, on its proper construction, brings in by reference the entire Part III [which includes section 16 (3) of the Telegraph Act] and the District Judge by refusing to entertain the application for determination of compensation has failed to exercise a jurisdiction vested in him by law. Shri B. L. Seth, the learned counsel for the Board, on the other hand, supports the reasoning and order of the District Judge. 4. To appreciate the rival contentions, it is necessary first to read section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, which is as under: 42. Powers to Board for placing wires, poles, etc. Shri B. L. Seth, the learned counsel for the Board, on the other hand, supports the reasoning and order of the District Judge. 4. To appreciate the rival contentions, it is necessary first to read section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, which is as under: 42. Powers to Board for placing wires, poles, etc. Notwithstanding anything contained in sections 12 to 16 and 18 and 19 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, but without prejudice to the requirements of section 17 of that Act where provision in such behalf is made in a sanctioned scheme, the Board shall have, for the placing of any wires, poles, Wall-brackets, stays apparatus and appliances for the transmission and distribution of electricity, or for the transmission of telegraphic or telephonic communications necessary for the proper co-ordination of the works of the Board, all the powers which the telegraph authority possesses under Part III of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 with regard to a telegraph established or maintained by the Government or to be so established or maintained: Provided that where a sanctioned scheme does not make such provision as aforesaid, all the provisions of sections 12 to 19 of the first mentioned Act shall apply to the works of the Board. 5. Part III of the Telegraph Act, 1885 to which reference is made in section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, may now be examined. This part contains sections 10 to 19-B under the heading Power to place telegraph lines and posts. Leaving aside the provisions which apply to property vested in local authorities, the scheme of these sections briefly stated is as follows. Section 10 enables the telegraph authority to place and maintain a telegraph line under, over, along or across, and posts in or upon, any immovable property. This enabling power is restricted by four provisos appended to the section. The proviso in clause (d), which enjoins the authority to do as little damage as possible and lays upon it the duty to pay full compensation for any damage caused in the exercise of its powers, is worded as follows: Section 10 (d) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. The proviso in clause (d), which enjoins the authority to do as little damage as possible and lays upon it the duty to pay full compensation for any damage caused in the exercise of its powers, is worded as follows: Section 10 (d) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. In the exercise of the powers conferred by this section, the telegraph authority shall do as little damage as possible, and, when it has exercised those powers in respect of any property other than that referred to in clause (c), shall pay full compensation to all persons interested for any damage sustained by them by reason of the exercise of those powers. Section 11 confers the power on the telegraph authority to enter on property in order to repair or remove telegraph lines or posts. Section 16(1) provides that if the telegraph authority is resisted or obstructed in exercise of its powers mentioned in section 29, presumably by private owners of property, the District Magistrate may, in his discretion, decide that the authority shall be permitted to exercise those powers. Any person disobeying the order of the District Magistrate is by force of section 16 (2) deemed to have committed an offence under section 188 of the Penal Code. In case of disputes as to sufficiency of compensation payable under section 10 (d), (quoted above), either of the disputing parties can apply to the District Judge under section 16 (3) which reads: If any dispute arises concerning the sufficiency of the compensation to be paid under section 10, clause (d), it shall, on application for that purpose by either of the disputing parties to the District Judge within whose jurisdiction the property is situate, be determined by him. Section 16 (5) makes the determination of the District Judge final. Section 17 contemplates that the person on Whose property telegraph lines or posts have been laid may for the beneficial use of his property require the telegraph authority to remove them to another part of the property or to alter them to meet the needs of the owner and any dispute in respect of this matter is to be settled by the District Magistrate. Section 18 provides that if trees interrupt the telegraphic communications they tray be removed on orders of a Magistrate who will also make an award of compensation in favour of persons interested in the trees. Section 18 provides that if trees interrupt the telegraphic communications they tray be removed on orders of a Magistrate who will also make an award of compensation in favour of persons interested in the trees. Section 19-A provides that if any person in exercise of his legal rights over his property is likely to damage telegraph lines or posts or interferes with telegraphic communications he must give prior notice to the telegraph authority and in the absence of notice a Magistrate on an application of telegraph, authority can order him to abstain from dealing with his property for a period of one month. 6. A reading of these sect-ions and others in Part III of the Telegraph Act goes to show that they are inter-connected with each other in the sense that they while conferring power on the telegraph authority to lay telegraph lines and posts in or upon any immovable property belonging to private owners provide for incidental rights and obligations of the respective parties and machinery for speedily resolving of such disputes as may arise in that connection. The sections form part of one scheme and are therefore collected in Part III of the Act which opens with a compendious HeadingPower to place telegraph lines and posts. 7. At this stage, before proceeding to examine section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, it is convenient to refer to certain general principles. A power is defined as ability conferred upon a person by the law to alter, by his own will directed to that end, the rights, duties, liabilities or other legal relations, either of himself or of other persons. (Jurisprudence, Salmond 12th edition, p. 229). A public authority has no power, unless conferred by law, to invade private property or to affect the rights of owners of such property. Without the support of legal authority, any invasion of private rights would amount to tort. Therefore, the Legislature to enable the achievement of public objects confers on public authorities statutory powers and, if that is done, invasion of private rights ceases to be a tort for a statutory authority is also a statutory indemnity taking away all legal remedies provided by the law of torts for persons injuriously affected; (The Law of Torts, Salmond, 13th edition, pp. 57, 58). 57, 58). There is no remedy in such cases in a Court of law L(except in case of abuse of power) unless a remedy is provided by the Statute and the remedy, if provided, is regarded as exclusive. In E. Fremantle Corporation v. Annois 1902 A. C. 213 p. 217 (P. C.), Lord Macnaghten speaking for their Lordships said: The law has been settled for the last hundred years. If person in the position of the appellants acting in the execution of a public trust and for the public benefit, do an act which they are authorised by law to do, and do it in a proper manner, though the act done works a special injury to a particular individual, the individual injured cannot maintain an action. He is without a remedy unless a remedy is provided by the statute. But the Legislature while legislating for attainment of public objects is not oblivious of private rights and effort is made to balance the needs of society with the rights of the individuals. The Legislature, therefore, while conferring power on public authorities to invade private property for achieving some public object imposes on them correlative duties for the benefit of the individuals and provides remedies for determination of incidental disputes. This is the idea which runs through the entire Part III of the Telegraph Act. 8. I now revert to section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, which I have already quoted in the beginning. This section opens with the heading. Powers to Board for placing wires, poles etc.. The section deals with the powers of a State Electricity Board in two cases, viz. (1) when there is a sanctioned scheme in which provision is made for the placing of any wires, poles, wall brackets, stays, apparatus and appliances for the transmission or distribution of electricity or for the transmission of telegraphic or telephonic communications necessary for the co-ordinating of the works of the Board; and (2) when there is no such sanctioned scheme. In the first case, the section enacts that the Board shall have . . . all the powers which the telegraph authority possesses under Part III of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 with regard to a telegraph established or maintained by the Government or to be so established or maintained. In the first case, the section enacts that the Board shall have . . . all the powers which the telegraph authority possesses under Part III of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 with regard to a telegraph established or maintained by the Government or to be so established or maintained. In the second case i. e. when there is no sanctioned scheme making provision in that behalf, sections 12 to 19 of the Electricity Act, 1910 apply to the works of the Board. 9. The question for consideration is as to what is the meaning of the wordsThe Board shall have . . . . . . all the powers which the telegraph authority possesses under Part III of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. Do these words confer on the Board all the powers together with the corresponding duties and obligations imposed on the telegraph authority in favour of persons whose rights are affected by the exercise of the powers with the incidental remedies which are all provided in Part III of the Telegraph Act, or do they merely confer the power dissociated from the duties, obligations and remedies? I have already said that having regard to the object of Part III of the Tele-graph Act and the general principles governing such legislations, the powers, duties, obligations and remedies provided in that Part of the Act are all connected by an intrinsic unity forming one scheme. That it is so, is evidenced by the Heading of Part III, which as already noticed is Power to place telegraph lines and posts. In my opinion, the conferment, by section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, on the Board of all the powers which the telegraph authority possesses under Part III of the Telegraph Act, 1885, brings into section 42 the whole frame-work of Part III i. e. powers, duties, obligations and remedies all of which are described by the word Power in the heading of that Part. Section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, in effect by reference incorporates mutatis mutandis all the provisions contained in Part III of the Telegraph Act. 10. This conclusion is strengthened by another consideration. In the absence of a sanctioned scheme, section 42 of 1he Electricity (Supply) Act applies sections 12 to 19 of the Electricity Act, 1910, which are grouped under the heading Worksin that Act. 10. This conclusion is strengthened by another consideration. In the absence of a sanctioned scheme, section 42 of 1he Electricity (Supply) Act applies sections 12 to 19 of the Electricity Act, 1910, which are grouped under the heading Worksin that Act. A look at these sections will show that they not only deal with bare power but also with duties, obligations and remedies. For example, section 19 of this Act provides for obligation to pay compensation and a remedy by arbitration in case of dispute as to its amount. Therefore, when section 42, in case of a sanctioned scheme, brings in powers under Part III of the Telegraph Act in substitution to sections 12 to 19 of the Electricity Act, 1910, it is reasonable to conclude that the idea was to bring in not merely the bare power but also duties and obligations and remedies connected with that power. 11. Moreover, a contrary conclusion, that the remedy under section 16 (3) is not brought in by section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act and the remedy is by an ordinary suit, will lead to serious inconvenience to both the parties. Instead of getting the benefit of their disputes as to compensation speedily and cheaply settled by a senior judicial officer like the District Judge, they will have to undergo the entire gamut of usually tardy and costly proceedings of a civil suit and its various stages of appeal and second appeal. Further, instead of having the benefit of getting all disputes, that may arise in implementation of a scheme covering a large tract of territory, decided in one Court of the District, the Board may be harassed in different Courts at various places in the District. In my view, such an inconvenient result was not intended by the Legislature. I think, that the rules of construction are not so rigid as to prevent me in reaching to a realistic solution which avoids serious inconvenience to all parties concerned. 12. In my view, such an inconvenient result was not intended by the Legislature. I think, that the rules of construction are not so rigid as to prevent me in reaching to a realistic solution which avoids serious inconvenience to all parties concerned. 12. As a result of the above discussion, I hold that when in pursuance to a sanctioned scheme the State Electricity Board by virtue of section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, exercises the powers under Part III of the Telegraph Act, it becomes subject to the obligation to pay full compensation to all persons interested for all damage sustained by them as provided in proviso (d) to section 10 and further, in case of dispute, as to the sufficiency of the compensation the obligation is to pay such compensation as may be determined by the District Judge under section 16 (3) of the Act. The District, Judge is thus competent to entertain an application under section 16 (3) of the Telegraph Act for determining the compensation payable under proviso (d) to section 10 even when power is exercised under that section by virtue of section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act. 13. This revision succeeds. The order of the District Judge dated 17-11-1966 is set aside and he is directed to determine the applicants application according to law. The applicant will get his costs of this Court from the non-applicant. Counsels fee, Rs. 100 if certified. Costs in the lower Court will be costs in the cause.