T NAGA MALLESHWARI Vs. MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order dated 22-12-2004 in Rc.No.415/ 2004/C passed by the first respondent under Section 133 Cr.P.C. is challenged in this petition.

(2.) The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that since the first respondent is not specially empowered by the State Government to pass an order under Section 133 Cr.P.C., the impugned order is liable to be set aside. It is also his contention that since the site, in respect of which the first respondent passed the order, is not a thorough fare or road, but is a private property belonging to the petitioners and since the petitioners were not afforded an opportunity of being heard and since no enquiry whatsoever was conducted by the first respondent, the impugned order is liable to be set side.

(3.) The contention of the learned Government Pleader is that since the petitioners have an effective alternative remedy of revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C., this petition is not maintainable.