KATHMANDU: Justices of the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court (SC) and advocates of Nepal Bar Association have traded in accusations while hearing the writ petitions on the dissolution of the House of Representatives (HoR).
Senior Advocate Raman Shrestha demanded that the writs filed against the dissolution of the House of Representatives (HoR) should be heard through the Full Constitutional Bench, not the Constitutional Bench.
No sooner Advocate Shrestha put forth this demand, than the dispute cropped up between the Constitutional Bench and the Amicus Curiae in the Supreme Court.
A writ petition has been filed at the Supreme Court (SC) demanding that the Full Constitutional Bench should hear the writs filed against the HoR.
Advocate Kanchan Krishna Neupane said a joint writ was filed on Tuesday to this effect. The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court is dwelling on the same writ petition now.
A many as 12 individuals including Advocate Neupane, Dev Gurung, senior advocate Dinesh Tripathi filed an application in line with Article 128 of the Constitution demanding that their writ petitions should be heard through a full constitutional bench.
CJ Rana has picked Justices for the Constitutional Bench in random, not based on seniority.
The Constitutional Bench led by CJ Rana has Justices Bishwombhar Prasad Shrestha, Hari Krishna Karki, Anil Kumar Sinha and Tej Bahadur KC as members.
Earlier, advocates had raised questions over the formation of the Constitutional Bench arguing that the formation of the Constitutional Bench is not in line with the provision of the Constitution.
The writs were registered at the Supreme Court against the decision naming the Office of the President, Office of the Prime Minister, and the Council of Ministers and House Speaker as defendants.
The Bench is hearing as many as 13 writ petitions filed at the apex court against the HoR dissolution today.
It may be noted that President Bidya Bhandari had dissolved the HoR on the recommendation of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli.
Comment