The ruling UML has dismissed the petition filed by the Supreme Court against the donation of land taken from Bhatbhateni supermarket owner Meen Bahadur Gurung. A joint bench of Supreme Court Justices Abdul Aziz Muslim and Balkrishna Dhakal dismissed the writ on Monday.

Lawyers Gyan Bahadur Basnet, Shyamakrishna Maske and Arjun Thapa filed a petition with UML and Gurung as opponents to stop the grant of land as it would disturb the transparency and rule of law if the party office of the political party is built by businessmen.

While hearing the writ on November 12, Judge Sunil Kumar Pokharel's bench stopped the donation of land for the time being, saying that taking financial support and donations from a businessman would benefit the ruling party. However, Monday's bench also canceled its previous stand and short-term interim order that the act of constructing a building by donating land from a businessman is 'prima facie not in accordance with the law'. 

Gurung has donated 10 ropani 14 annas of land in Kirtipur to build the office of UML. UML President and Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli laid the foundation stone of the party office building on that land on October 25. The party office will also be built by Gurung. Which was opposed by the opposition parties to the civil society, while the dissatisfaction was boiling within the UML. 

Supreme Court Registrar Bhadrakali Pokharel filed the writ petition against land donation on November 1 saying that it cannot be registered. After the registrar argued that the rights of the petitioners could not be established, the petitioners reached the bench. The bench of Judge Til Prasad Shrestha overruled the bench order of the registrar and ordered to register a writ. In the

writ, it was claimed that it was unfair to take donations from Gurung as two cases were pending in the court and he had been convicted by the court. Gurung was convicted in the Lalita Niwas case. The special court sentenced him to 2 years imprisonment and confiscation of land with a fine of 80 lakh rupees. It was mentioned in the petition that the party leading the government from Gurung, who is facing a case after paying a bail of 24.6 million in that case, would have a conflict of interest when taking donations for the construction of the office. 

'Is it a conflict of interest for the accused in the case, who is a pro-government, to give land to the UML, which is running the same government, at a price of more than one billion according to the current market price, and the UML to take it? Is this kind of transaction between 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 Prime Minister is under the influence of interest groups?'

On November 12, Judge Pokharel's bench had ordered to stop the act of accepting donations for the time being as it could create a 'quid pro quo' situation. The Latin word 'quid pro quo' has a legal meaning - to transact for one's benefit. In the light of the fact that the party in power will benefit, there is no transparency, the process including the election may be affected and the situation of 'quid pro quo' may be created, from the point of view of the balance of convenience, until the interim order is resolved through the discussion of the interim order, according to the application claim, the donation of 10 ropani 14 annas land is said to have been donated and transferred. Do not/do not' was said in the order.