A homeowner in India discovered that a government-allotted house was being occupied by a driver. Despite lodging complaints with various authorities, including the State, District, and Mandal Legal Services, the driver continued to reside there. The driver presented forged government documents to the Mandal Legal Services Committee Judge, claiming the house was allotted to him. The Judge, instead of verifying the documents, requested the homeowner not to escalate the matter. Is the homeowner legally justified in approaching the High Court? Provide advice and relevant legal rulings or Acts.

Last updated: August 25, 2025 12:59 pm

10 months ago

Law Forum › Category: Criminal › A homeowner in India discovered that a government-allotted house was being occupied by a driver. Despite lodging complaints with various authorities, including the State, District, and Mandal Legal Services, the driver continued to reside there. The driver presented forged government documents to the Mandal Legal Services Committee Judge, claiming the house was allotted to him. The Judge, instead of verifying the documents, requested the homeowner not to escalate the matter. Is the homeowner legally justified in approaching the High Court? Provide advice and relevant legal rulings or Acts.

Vote Up
227
Vote Down

Apni Law Staff asked 10 months ago

A homeowner in India discovered that a government-allotted house was being occupied by a driver. Despite lodging complaints with various authorities, including the State, District, and Mandal Legal Services, the driver continued to reside there. The driver presented forged government documents to the Mandal Legal Services Committee Judge, claiming the house was allotted to him. The Judge, instead of verifying the documents, requested the homeowner not to escalate the matter. Is the homeowner legally justified in approaching the High Court? Provide advice and relevant legal rulings or Acts.

1 Answers

Vote Up
22
Vote Down

Best Answer

Apni Law Staff answered 10 months ago

Yes, the homeowner is legally justified in approaching the High Court. The Judge’s failure to verify the forged documents and request to not escalate the matter constitutes a miscarriage of justice. The homeowner can seek relief under Article 226 of the Constitution, citing the violation of their right to property and seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the Judge’s order and mandamus to initiate appropriate legal action against the driver. The relevant legal rulings would be the Supreme Court’s pronouncements on the right to property and the duty of the judiciary to uphold the law.