The MPs objected that the judge's recommendation was not inclusive. In Saturday's meeting of the parliamentary hearing committee, the MPs disagreed that the Justice Council did not adopt inclusivity when recommending judges for the Supreme Court.

Senior advocate Mahesh Nepal has been recommended as a member of the Judicial Council. The Judicial Council has recommended senior advocate Meghraj Pokharel, Janakpur High Court Judge Shrikant Paudel and Dipayal High Court Chief Justice Shantisingh Thapa as judges of the Supreme Court.

Janata Samajwadi Party MP Prakash Adhikari while speaking in the committee meeting said that the judicial council did not adopt inclusiveness despite recommending four people. He opined that the committee should take action, saying that even though the MPs raised questions time and again, the judicial council did not pay attention. He said, "Even now, three or four people have been recommended." But inclusion has not happened. We are repeatedly asking the question, but why is the government's attention not going there? Now the hearing committee should think about what to do.'

The presiding officer also informed that 52 members of the Constitutional Council are being heard. He questioned the fact that one of them was also a member of the Justice Council and that he was in a hurry to make all the appointments by keeping the same person. He said, 'Why is there a rush to keep that person and appoint everyone? Does this not raise a constitutional question?'

CPN (UML) Chief Whip Mahesh Bertaula, mentioning that the number of cases is increasing and cannot be resolved, said that the Justice Council made a late recommendation and now the parliamentary hearing should be expedited. He said, "The pressure of cases has increased, clearance is not being done." The Judicial Council should have recommended earlier. It's too late now. Inclusion, legal questions can all be. But it should be heard quickly.

Nepali Congress Member of Parliament Jeevan Pariyar said that the judicial committee should be called to the committee and asked for an answer, saying that there is no inclusion in the judge's recommendation. He said, 'State structures—executive, legislature, judiciary—all have their own jurisdiction. The Judicial Council also has jurisdiction. The law minister is the representative of the government. No complaints about recommended people. They are qualified people. However, questions of inclusivity have been raised. Therefore, it should be considered whether the judicial council can be called to the committee and discussed. He said, "We have to think above the opposition and the ruling party." New thinking should be developed. The issue of inclusiveness should be discussed with the Justice Council.

Nepali Congress MP Anand Prasad Dhungana said that rather than the Justice Council, the Law Minister should be called to the committee and questioned. He reminded that in the past also the law minister was called to the committee and asked. Dhungana said, "The second senior judge of the Supreme Court wrote in the meeting of the Judicial Council that there was corruption in the court." There was a lot of discussion at that time too. Parliament cannot interfere in the courts. The Law Minister should come and answer. It should be decided from here whether to call the council or not.