The Supreme Court had declared Prime Minister Manmohan Adhikari's recommendation for the dissolution of Parliament and mid-term elections unconstitutional on Bhadra 12, 2052. Dissatisfied with the verdict, the UML had filed an impeachment motion at the Parliament Secretariat against Chief Justice Bishwanath Upadhyay, along with two judges who had led the Supreme Court in favor of the restoration of Parliament.

But Speaker Ramchandra Poudel had decided not to move the impeachment motion forward in the parliament by exercising his special powers.

The UML, expressing dissatisfaction with the Speaker's decision, disrupted the meeting of the House of Representatives on Asoj 7, 2052, and did not allow the discussion on the policies and programs presented by the government in the ninth session to proceed. UML had protested against Speaker Poudel's decision not to take the impeachment motion registered against Chief Justice Upadhyay and Supreme Court Justice Surendra Prasad Singh for lack of efficiency and failure to perform their duties as per the dignity of their positions for discussion in the House of Representatives.

The UML had maintained that the House would not be allowed to function unless the motion was discussed in the Parliament. When the UML did not give up its insistence, Speaker Poudel adjourned the Parliament till 2 pm in the meeting called in the morning after reading the letter received from the palace. After the day-long meeting of the Business Advisory Committee to resolve the dispute failed to reach an agreement, Local Development Minister Kamal Thapa presented a proposal of public importance regarding Kathmandu's garbage in the meeting that lasted for 10 minutes.

The UML had maintained its stance that Bishwanath should be charged with lack of efficiency until the day before his retirement. The impeached Judge Surendra Prasad Singh was accused of age and disobedience. Bishwanath was retiring on Asoj 8, 2052.

Strategy to stop Singh, bring in Rana

The Judicial Council had already recommended Surendra Prasad Singh's name as the successor to Bishwanath Upadhyay three days in advance. After the impeachment motion was accepted and went for discussion, the UML could not move forward alone due to the constitutional provision that it must be passed by a two-thirds majority of the House.

There was no possibility of the impeachment being passed if the ruling party did not want it. But the secret hidden in the UML's impeachment motion is that it wanted to prevent Singh from becoming the Chief Justice. The UML was determined to move the motion forward because Singh could not be appointed as the Chief Justice if the Speaker had not rejected it. There was a constitutional provision that judges could not even do their work after the charges were filed and discussed. The same provision still exists.

At that time, Trilok Pratap Rana was in line for the position of Chief Justice after Singh. The UML wanted to make Rana the Chief Justice. Because, if Singh could not be appointed, Rana would have been appointed as the Chief Justice according to the roll call. Rana was also one of the three judges who stood in favor of Prime Minister Manmohan Adhikari's dissolution of Parliament during the Supreme Court's decision. Therefore, the UML wanted to discuss the impeachment in the House of Representatives as per the strategy of making Rana the Chief Justice. In the discussion of the House of Representatives' Business Committee, the UML was demanding that the impeachment motion be revived and, if not, another motion be registered accordingly.