MPs have objected to the discussion being held in the Public Accounts Committee while the case regarding Jagdulla Hydropower is pending in the Supreme Court.

The committee met to discuss the complaint filed by Chinese company Jiangxi Construction Engineering Corporation (JCE) about the submission of fake documents to get the contract for the 106-megawatt Jagadulla Hydropower Project. In the meeting, the lawmakers said that it would not be appropriate to discuss the matter as it has reached the court.

UML lawmaker Gokul Baskota said that although there should be an investigation into any irregularities, the case that has reached the Supreme Court should be resolved from the court itself. He mentioned that it would be better if the matter of fake documents was investigated by the concerned body.

Baskota, who is also the former Minister of Communications, said, "When the case has been filed in court, the hearing has been held, it seems that the application filed with the Public Accounts Committee is also fake. The matter is pending in the court, now it will be resolved from there." Even if the Accounts Committee gives instructions, the case will not be dismissed, the Supreme Court's order is final, so there is no need to discuss it further.'

CPN (Maoist Center) MP Janardan Sharma has said that committee chairman Hrishikesh Pokharel made a mistake by holding a discussion on the matter that reached the Supreme Court. He had asked the chairman why the discussion was held on the matter that went to court.

According to him, Nepal has started bearing a loss of more than Rs 3.75 billion due to the Jagadulla not being built in a year. He had expressed dissatisfaction over the non-progress of projects like Paschim Seti, Narsingh Ghat, Kimathanka, and Naumure. Sharma said, 'We are losing Rs 3.75 billion due to the delay of one year in building the Jagadulla Hydropower. Money is stuck in the bank, why are the projects not being progressed?'

Nepali Congress MP Rajendra KC has demanded an investigation, saying that there have been complaints that the Chinese company was not qualified to win the contract and that other people's certificates were used.

He said, ‘Looking at the complaint, it appears that the Chinese company that took over Jagdulla has given a certificate of qualification using African documents. It has submitted documents for work that it did not do, and an investigation should be conducted.’

UML MP Yogesh Bhattarai said that it is not possible to say clearly about the alleged irregularities in the contract system at this time. He mentioned that such issues should be looked into by the Public Procurement Monitoring Office or the Review Committee rather than the Accounts Committee.

He said, ‘The case has also gone to court. It seems that the court has not given any instructions to stop the construction, it should be resolved by the court itself.’

To get the contract for the Jagdulla project, JCE/ANK JV had submitted documents showing that it had built a 90-megawatt project in China in collaboration with the Chinese company Hezhou Shangcheng Electric Power Company. However, a dispute arose after Hezhou sent a letter claiming that its name and seal had been used illegally.

The project has not been able to move forward due to complaints filed with the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament, the court, and the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority.

Out of the four companies that applied, Sino Hydro Power and JCE/ANK JV were shortlisted. Sino Hydro Power had filed a complaint alleging that the company was shortlisted for the project because it did not meet the project's qualifications.