JUDGMENT : P.K. Tripathy, J. - This appeal has been filed against the order of acquittal granted u/s 255(1), Cr.P.C. by learned J.M.S.C., Berhampur in favour of the respondent in 3(a) C.C. Case No. 342 of 1986, as per the impugned judgment dated 27th June, 1987, 2. It appears from the impugned judgment and the L.C.R. that respondent faced the trial for the offence punishable u/s 385-A of the Orissa Municipal Act (in short, "the Act") on the allegation that she had constructed a new pucca building in Bhapur Bazar street abutting to the public road within Berhampur Municipality area without obtaining permission of the said Municipality, as required under the provision in Sections 264 and 266 of the Act. Respondent took the plea of complete denial. In course of trial, appellant examined three witnesses and relied on documents marked Exts. 1 to 5. The trial Court, on assessment of evidence, did not find the evidence led by the prosecution sufficient to warrant a conviction inasmuch as it did not specify the date of commencement of the offence and did not led evidence that complaint was made within one year from the date of commencement of the offence. Trial Court also recorded the finding that prosecution failed to prove service of show-cause notice on the accused and, therefore, benefit of doubt arising therefrom should go in favour of the accused. 3. In course of hearing, while unable to explain about the aforesaid lacunae, learned counsel for the appellant states that since the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 3 shows that construction was made by the respondent, the impugned order of acquittal should be interfered with. This Court finds no reasonableness in that argument. Though the question of want of authorisation, as required u/s 99 of the Act is concerned, was not taken into consideration by the trial Court but on perusal of record this Court finds want of proper authorisation by the Executive Officer in accordance with the said provision of law. Be that as it may, the ground which the trial Court has assigned is not found to be illegal or erroneous so as to interfere with the order of acquittal. The Criminal Appeal stands dismissed accordingly. Final Result : Dismissed