Kathmandu — The Supreme Court has upheld the appointment of 52 constitutional office bearers pending for a long time. The appointment of 20 office bearers on 10 Ashad 2078, based on the ordinance brought by the then KP Sharma Oli-led government, was upheld unanimously, while the appointment of 32 office bearers on 21 Magh 2077 was upheld by a majority.

Justices Sapana Pradhan Malla, Kumar Chudal and Manoj Sharma have ordered that the appointment of 32 office bearers made four and a half years ago will be upheld. After hearing the case pending for four and a half years 11 times, the bench took 48 days to pronounce the decision.

Justices Chudal and Sharma have stated that the reason for upholding the appointment is that the President can bring an ordinance on the recommendation of the executive and the ordinance brought in this way is deemed to be implemented after verification. They have also submitted the reason that ‘the members provided for by the constitution were not deprived of the meeting of the Constitutional Council, and that there was no objection from the leader of the then opposition party in the House of Representatives, who was a member of the Constitutional Council.’ The additional reasons stated are, ‘Since it is evident from the writ petition that the then Speaker of the House of Representatives, a member of the Constitutional Council, was informed of the meeting at 9 am on 30 Mangsir 2077, the meeting held at 5 pm on 30 Mangsir 2077 was a continuation of the meeting that morning, and in a situation where such a practice has been going on, the writ petitioner, although the then Speaker of the House of Representatives, a member of the Constitutional Council, is not a demand to be allowed to participate in the meeting of the Constitutional Council, but a demand for an order to ‘not do such a thing in the future’, and the fact that he is not currently a member of the Constitutional Council and that the circumstances have changed, the writ petition is dismissed as it does not appear that a writ should be issued as per the petitioner’s demand.’