AMITAVA LALA, J. ( 1 ) THIS is an application under article 227 of the Constitution of India. This application arises out of an order dated 26th august, 2003 passed by the learned District judge, Barasat, 24 pgs. (North) in Misc. Appeal No. 133 of 2003 setting aside the order dated 25th July, 2003 passed by the learned civil Judge, Junior Division, Barrackpore in t. S. No. 111 of 2003. The suit was in the nature of declaration and permanent injunction. Prayers in the plaint are quoted here- under:" (A) A declaration that the plaintiffs are the exclusive owners of the suit property as specified in the schedule written hereunder and that the defendants have got no right to have any aerial encroachment of the suit property for installation of High Tension overhead electric Lines all over the suit property without having any due concurrence from the plaintiffs. (B) Permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men and agents, employees and associates from causing any aerial encroachment upon the suit property or upon any part thereof so as to going line all over the suit property as specified in the schedule written hereunder till final disposal of the suit. (C) cost of the suit. (D) Any other relief or reliefs. " ( 2 ) IN such suit, an application under order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was made by the plaintiffs before the Court of first instance. The prayer in such application is as follows :"the defendants are hereby restrained from causing any aerial encroachment upon the suit property or upon any part thereof so as to going for installation of high tension over head electric lines all over the suit property as specified in the schedule of the injunction application till the disposal of the suit. The ad-interim order of injunction is thus made absolute. The temporary injunction application is thus allowed on contest". The ad-interim order of injunction is thus made absolute. The temporary injunction application is thus allowed on contest". ( 3 ) CHALLENGING the said order, the Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation Limited (hereinafter called as C. E. S. C. Ltd.) preferred an appeal before the learned District judge, where under it was held that the work of the C. E. S. C. Ltd. is done under a sanctioned scheme with due notification and most part of it has been completed and it cannot be implemented finally as the chains from two sides by way of erection of towers cannot be connected with the electric supply line running over the property of the respondents (plaintiffs) for their resistance through the interim order of injunction. The learned Judge appreciated the worries of the respondents that running of the electric supply line with high voltage electricity may affect in some way their lands since he will be resisted from making vertical construction over the same but the scheme is running with the provision of making compensation for the loss in execution of the scheme over the suit property. The learned judge further held that the respondents can be satisfied with the payment of compensation to the loss they are facing under the scheme like others. The spirit of the order, as I have understood, the public purpose will be given importance over the public necessity. ( 4 ) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that in the notification C. E. S. C. Ltd. has not given particulars of Mouzas of land but proceeded on the basis of the Police Stations. That apart, the newspapers, in which the publications were made, cannot be said to be widely circulated newspapers. Therefore, they were not in a position to understand and appropriate at the point of publications to oppose the same. The respondents, on the other hand contended that as and when the notification was published in the Calcutta Gazette, it has to be construed that the public notice is given. ( 5 ) I have gone through the respective notifications given one after another. From the first notification dated 12th January, 2000, I find that the C. E. S. C. Ltd. wanted to draw 220 k. v. d. c. transmission line between Titagarh and Mulajore. the length of which is about 15 km. ( 5 ) I have gone through the respective notifications given one after another. From the first notification dated 12th January, 2000, I find that the C. E. S. C. Ltd. wanted to draw 220 k. v. d. c. transmission line between Titagarh and Mulajore. the length of which is about 15 km. with new 220 k. v. sub-station of Titagarh and Mulajore at an estimated cost of about Rs. 45 crores. Such initiation was taken in accordance with section 28 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. In the last part of such notification I find that further details of the scheme and plan may be seen from the office of the C. E. S. C. Ltd. situated at Poddar Court, 18, rabindra Sarani, Calcutta- 700001, on any full working day during the period from 10 a. m. to 1 p. m. Thereafter, again by a further notification on 28th August, 2000 it has notified that construction of such 220 k. v. AC, DC Transmission line in such place will be made in accordance with Section 28 (3) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 giving particulars of Mouzas. It is pertinent to mention here such Mouzas were available in the earlier notification save and except the heading Mouzas. It was also notified that it is in the opinion of the Governor the public interest so permits now, therefore, under Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, c. E. S. C. Ltd. is authorised to have all the powers for placement of electric supply lines, associated apparatus and appliances including wires, towers and other appliances for the overhead transmission line from titagarh to Mulajore erection which the Telegraph Authority possesses under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885 ). The governor is further pleased to notify the scheme as aforesaid in the Official Gazette. ( 6 ) IT is to be remembered hereunder that both the notifications were issued by the joint Secretary to the Government of West bengal, Department of power. Therefore, the c. E. S. C. Ltd. is the executing authority. Accordingly, such wire was fixed and save and except, the petitioners herein, no one raised any objection about giving aerial connections. ( 7 ) THE petitioners contentions are that firstly, there is no occasion arises to the learned Judge, First Appellate Court to proceed on the principles of public purpose visa-vis public necessity. Accordingly, such wire was fixed and save and except, the petitioners herein, no one raised any objection about giving aerial connections. ( 7 ) THE petitioners contentions are that firstly, there is no occasion arises to the learned Judge, First Appellate Court to proceed on the principles of public purpose visa-vis public necessity. He should have restricted himself within the four corners of the order passed by the learned Court of first instance. Secondly, an amount of 45 crores alleged to be involved hereunder but no permission was taken from the appropriate authority of the Central Government before commencement. Thirdly, high tension electric line for about 1. 3 lakh volt over landed property of the petitioners were drawn dehors the notification which is only restricted to the extent of 220 k. v. Fourthly, if any inspection is made, it will be seen that how the petitioners became the sufferers. There is no inbuilt protection which is required to be made for the purpose of drawing such line. ( 8 ) BEFORE going into the other aspects of the matter, I want to analyse the protection part first. Because, according to me this is the root cause of dispute between the parties. Rule 80 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 speaks about clearance from buildings of high and extra-high voltage line. In respect of horizontal clearance, sub-rule (2) speaks that such clearance between the nearest conductor and any part of such building shall, on the basis of maximum deflection due to wind, be not less than (A) for high voltage lines up to and including 11,000 volts. . 1. 2 metres (B) for high voltage lines above 11,000 volts up to and including 33,000 volts 2. 0 metres (C) for extra-high voltage line. . 2. 0 metres plus 3. 0 metres for every additional 33,000 volts or part thereof. ( 9 ) IN 1985 by way of explanation it was inserted that for the purpose of this rule expression "building" shall be deemed to include any structure, whether permanent or temporary. ( 10 ) MR. 0 metres (C) for extra-high voltage line. . 2. 0 metres plus 3. 0 metres for every additional 33,000 volts or part thereof. ( 9 ) IN 1985 by way of explanation it was inserted that for the purpose of this rule expression "building" shall be deemed to include any structure, whether permanent or temporary. ( 10 ) MR. P. K. Roy, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent C. E. S. C. Ltd. contended before this court that the requisite vertical clearance in case of high /extra high voltage overhead line under Rule 80 of the Indian Electricity rules, 1956, if proceeded on the basis of the statement of the petitioners that 1. 3 lac volt line has been drawn over the landed property of the petitioners, then the distance will be as per the particulars given here under:voltage Distance upto 33000 V 3. 7 metres 1st addl. 33000 V 0. 3 metres 2nd addl. 33000 V 0. 3 " 3rd addl. 33000 V 0. 3 " 1,32000 V 4. 6 metres ( 11 ) THEREFORE, there cannot be any objection on the part of the petitioners in disallowing the C. E. S. C. Ltd. in carrying out the work for the public purpose. There is an appropriate protection as per the rules and they followed the same. Moreover drawing such lines is allegation of the petitioners. ( 12 ) SO far as taking permission of the appropriate authority of the Central Government as per Section 28 (3) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 is concerned, it was previously up to the tune of Rs. 5 crores on account of capital expenditure. But by subsequent amendment introduced in 1991 every scheme estimated to involve a capital expenditure exceeding such sum, as may be fixed by the Central Government, from time to time, by notification in the official Gazette, shall as soon as may be after it is prepared, be submitted to the authority for its concurrence. A Notification issued by the joint Secretary to the Government of India, ministry of Power issued in the year 1998 followed by a circular issued in the year 1999 speak in respect of the very nature of the work no permission is required for the project less than Rs. 250 crores. Therefore, it is needless to say that any permission or concurrence is required where the estimate is about Rs. 250 crores. Therefore, it is needless to say that any permission or concurrence is required where the estimate is about Rs. 45 crores. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the submission of Mr. Sadananda Ganguly, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners on that score. Mr. Ganguly further pointed out that Section 28 is the appropriate Section but not section 29 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. But, according to me, Section 28 has no independent role to play unless the concurrence is obtained under Section 29 (1) of act. Even Section 28 (2) proviso itself says that the scheme will not be made except with the previous concurrence of the authority. But, whether in this situation, it is necessary or not that has to be adjudged on the basis of the Section 29 of the Act followed by supportive documents being the necessary amendment, notification and circular. ( 13 ) THEREFORE, the remaining dispute is at all any interference has been caused to the petitioners in drawing such line by the c. E. S. C. Ltd. or not. From the conclusion it appears to this Court that there is a difference of 4. 6 metres and as per the rules, there should be a difference of 4 to 5 metres. Hence, leaving aside only one question as to at all C. E. S. C. Ltd. can instal such line from the middle point of the hanging position up to the premises as such difference or not and a report was necessitated by the Court. Therefore, the Court was pleased to appoint one of the members of the Bar for inspection and furnish a report before this Court in respect of the distance between the middle point of such electrical line up to the structure and the report clearly speaks that the distance from the middle joint of electrical line up to the ground is 56 4". The distance from the middle point of the electrical line is 39 8". Hence, the maximum deflection due to the wind have been properly dealt with by the C. E. S. C. Ltd. In such case, there is no deviation in making such aerial line over the premises of the petitioners to cause any hazard. ( 14 ) SO far the question of public purpose and public necessity, it is not alien to this subject. ( 14 ) SO far the question of public purpose and public necessity, it is not alien to this subject. It is most important subject- matter to draw a line of balance of convenience. Therefore, no wrong had been committed by the learned first appellate Court in taking such principle to come to a conclusion. ( 15 ) UNDER such circumstances, I do not find any substance in the submission of the petitioners, the application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, therefore, stands dismissed. ( 16 ) THE Interim orders stand vacated. The special officer stands discharged. ( 17 ) HOWEVER, there will be no order as to costs. ( 18 ) THE learned Court of first Instance is hereby requested to give expeditious hearing and dispose of the suit preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order. ( 19 ) URGENT xerox certified copy of this order be supplied to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of putting necessary requisites. Application dismissed.