ORDER 1. Heard Mr. S.D. Sanjay for the petitioners and Mr. Sanjay Singh, S.C. IX appearing on behalf of the State. 2. There are four petitioners in this case who have come to this Court against the threatened demolition of portions of their houses for the alleged reason that the houses encroached upon some public land. The procedure adopted by the respondent authorities is all too familiar by now. After taking some measurements, according to the petitioners taken behind their back and without giving them a prior notice, the authorities came to hold and believe that the houses were encroaching upon some public land. They further deemed that the orders passed by this Court in CWJC No. 2290 of 1990 gave them the licence to act unilaterally and to order demolition of the houses on the basis of the measurements taken by them. They accordingly put some red marks on the houses indicating the extent to which houses encroached upon public land. In case the petitioners carried out the demolition on their own, well and good failing which the houses would be demolished forcibly (to the extent indicated by the red marks) and the expenses realised from the petitioners. 3. Before proceeding further, it may be noted that the house of petitioners 1 and 4 is situate on plot no. 520 (old)/921 (new) under khata no. 203. The plot of land has an area of 1 katha 2 dhurs. The house of petitioner no. 3 is situate on plot no. 575 (old)/919 (new) under the same Khata and it has an area of 1 katha 11 dhurs. The house of petitioner no. 2 is situate on plot no. 520 (old)/915 (new) under the same khata and it has an area of 3 kathas. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, it is stated that all these three plots are part of cadestral survey plot no. 541, under khata no. 221 in revenue village Hasanpur Surat, Thana no. 211. It is further stated that in the cadestral survey records, the plot was shown as public land being road. I may just pause here to note that the cadestral survey operations were conducted in the last decade of the previous century, that is to say, about a century ago. 221 in revenue village Hasanpur Surat, Thana no. 211. It is further stated that in the cadestral survey records, the plot was shown as public land being road. I may just pause here to note that the cadestral survey operations were conducted in the last decade of the previous century, that is to say, about a century ago. From the statements made in the counter affidavit, it would appear that the road, the encroachment of which is alleged by the respondent authorities lay at the back of the petitioners houses. 5. A rejoinder affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners in which a copy of the revisional survey map is brought on record as Annexure 4. In the revisional survey map a road is shown on the front side of the petitioners' houses and in respect of this road there is no allegation of any encroachment. It is, thus, to be seen that the respondent authorities deemed it fit to propose demolishing portions of the petitioners' houses without giving them any prior notice and without instituting a proceeding under any statute simply on the basis of survey entries that were a century old and chose to disregard the fact that in the revisional survey map the position was shown to have been substantially changed. To top it all, they claim to act under the pretext of orders passed by this court. I am firmly of the view that the action of the respondent authorities in acting in this manner goes beyond arbitrariness and borders on perversity. 6. The respondent authorities or any functionary under them going over the petitioners' land with a view to carry out the threatened demolition would be clearly committing criminal trespass and it would be open to the petitioners to exercise their right of private defence, in accordance with law. 7. I accordingly restrain the respondent authorities from carrying out the threatened demolition of the petitioners' houses in pursuance of the red marks having been put there. In case the respondent authorities have reasons to believe that the petitioners' houses encroach upon public land, it will be open to them to institute a suit or atleast a proceeding under the relevant statute and to proceed in accordance with law. 8. In the result, this writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions.