The UML party headed by Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli has mentioned in the Supreme Court's short-term interim order that the donation of land and buildings from Bhatbhateni supermarket owner Meen Bahadur Gurung is prima facie not in accordance with the law. The Supreme Court has issued an order on Monday after the preliminary hearing of the petition filed in the Supreme Court against the decision of UML to donate land and building for the construction of the central office.

While hearing the writ petition filed by advocate Gyan Bahadur Basnet, the bench of Supreme Court judge Sunil Kumar Pokharel has written that the act of taking donation of land by UML is against the law .

'The matter of the Prime Minister's party taking a land donation from another opposition party is a matter of public interest and a meaningful relationship with citizens like the petitioner. Thus, as the petitioner raised in the application letter, the opposition Nepal Communist Party UML, another opponent, Meen Bahadur Gurung, owner of Bhatbhateni Department Company Pvt. Ltd., from Kathmandu. District Kirtipur Municipality Ward No. 2 The act of receiving a donation of 10 ropani and 14 annas of land in Maitrinagar is prima facie not in accordance with the provisions of Sections 38 (3) and 38 (6) of the Political Parties Act, 2073.

UML's act of taking land donation is also against the provision in Section 38 (5) of the Act on Political Parties that 'when providing financial support, the party should not receive any financial or personal benefit from the party and the party should not receive support by giving such benefit'. The court order mentions . In the

order, it is written in front, 'The party in power may benefit, there is no transparency, the processes including elections may be affected and unfair transactions may be created.' 

The Supreme Court has issued a short-term interim order not to do any work on the said land for the time being, saying that the 10 ropani 14 annas land where the central office will be built and the building to be built on it will be donated and Gurung will be given an unfair advantage in return. The writ petitioner and the opponents UML and Meen Bahadur Gurung have been called for discussion on Kartik 26.

Since UML is registered as a party in the Election Commission and is politically active, the Supreme Court has also said that it should follow the Act on Political Parties, the Good Governance (Management and Operation) Act.

UML President and Prime Minister Oli laid the foundation stone of the building on October 25 on the land donated by businessman Gurung. Advocates Basnet, Shyamakrishna Maske and Arjun Thapa filed a writ against UML and Bhatbhateni's owner Gurung saying that the action was against the law.

The said writ application was rejected by Supreme Registrar Bhadrakali Pokharel on Kartik 1 saying that it cannot be registered. The argument of the registrar was that 'the right of the petitioners cannot be established'.

The petitioners went to the bench with a writ petition against the bench order of the registrar. The bench of Judge Til Prasad Shrestha overruled the bench order of the registrar and ordered to register a writ petition. "The matter raised in the petition is seen to be brought as a dispute of public interest and the matter of whether or not the petitioners have the right to file a petition should be explained and presented at the bench level, so the bench order issued by the registrar of this court on 1st Kartik 2081 has been annulled," Judge Shrestha said in the order issued last Tuesday. is .  In the

writ petition, it is also mentioned that Gurung, the donor, and UML, the donor, are accused in the eyes of the government, two cases against Gurung are pending in the court and the court has convicted them. It is also mentioned in the petition that the person who donated the land of Lalita Niwas was found guilty and sentenced to 2 years imprisonment and a fine of 80 lakh rupees to confiscate the land.

It is mentioned in the application that taking donation for the construction of the office of the party leading the government from the accused, who is facing a case by paying a bond of 24.6 million in Lalita residence land corruption, is a conflict of interest . "Is it a conflict of interest to give land worth more than one billion to UML, which is running the same government as the accused in the case of being a pro-government, and UML to take it?", the question has been raised through the writ petition, "The party led by Finance Minister Bishnu Paudel, who has maintained that the land of Lalita Niwas and returned it, the government Is this kind of transaction between the running party and Meen Bahadur Gurung, who was arrested once and is still facing a case, just unethical or illegal? What will be the effect on the rule of law and good governance when the second largest party in the country leads the government and the prime minister of that party is under the influence of interest groups?'