The inquiry committee has published a report stating that the chairman and secretary of the state order and good governance committee have not fulfilled their responsibilities.
We use Google Cloud Translation Services. Google requires we provide the following disclaimer relating to use of this service:
This service may contain translations powered by Google. Google disclaims all warranties related to the translations, expressed or implied, including any warranties of accuracy, reliability, and any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and noninfringement.
The report prepared by the 'Special Committee to investigate the errors in the report of the Federal Civil Service Bill' has been made public. It was made public after committee chairman and Congress MP Jeevan Pariyar submitted the report to Speaker Devraj Ghimire on Tuesday.
In the report published by the committee, it is said that the Chairman of the State Order and Good Governance Committee, Ramhari Khatiwada and the secretary of the committee, Suraj Dura, have not fulfilled their responsibilities . "While the report was submitted to the assembly with the signature of the chairman, the chairman, who is the main responsibility of the committee, did not assume a responsible role in relation to the serious errors seen in the draft as a legal signatory," said the report of the investigation committee.
Similarly, the committee concluded that the committee secretary Dura has not fulfilled his responsibilities . "Secretary of the State Order and Good Governance Committee, Suraj Kumar Dura, has been present in the meetings of the sub-committee and committee from the beginning and also has the role of writing the report, so it cannot be said that he has fulfilled the defined responsibility," the report said.
The committee concluded that the draft of the bill should be adjusted in accordance with the legislative policy in accordance with the approved policy regarding the sub-section (4) and the retained sub-section (5) of the section 82 of the bill.
These are the errors seen by the Parliamentary Inquiry Committee
( 1) Sub-committee discussed section 82 of the bill in other sections and when preparing the final draft, in accordance with the accepted policy regarding "cooling off period" in section 82, section-by-section was not discussed in order to reconcile the legal identity between sub-section (4) and sub-section (5) which was retained. An error occurred .
(2) In the report submitted by the sub-committee to the committee, the committee dated 2082 . 02 . From the meeting of 2002, agreeing to the principle of having a cooling off period of two years and passing it unanimously with amendments, the honorable members of the committee were asked to review and discuss the revised report before submitting it to the assembly. It was seen that this was not done, so it was seen that the committee did not match the legal identity between sub-sections (4) and (5). It was seen that there was an error when the report of the committee was passed by the House of Representatives due to the lack of a system to combine the original bill
