Supreme Court spokesperson Arjun Koirala informed that in the 16 petitions initially filed with the Supreme Court and one petition filed later, all the defendants were required to comply with the time limit, but only some of them were complied with.
What you should know
In the Supreme Court, the writ petitions against the dissolution of the House of Representatives on the recommendation of Prime Minister Sushila Karki have been stuck in a 'time limit' for a week. While all the respondents in the 16 petitions initially filed in the Supreme Court and one petition filed later had to be served with time limits, only some of them have been served, informed Supreme Court spokesperson Arjun Koirala.
The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court had on 12 Kartik ordered the submission of a written response within seven days in the petition filed against the appointment of former Chief Justice Sushila Karki as Prime Minister and the dissolution of the House of Representatives after the Gen-G movement.
The Supreme Court, which did not issue an interim order as requested by the petitioner and legal practitioners, had given the opposition time to submit a written response within a week, excluding the deadline for submission. Even though a week has passed since the order was issued, the deadline has not been met. There is a legal provision to submit a response within a week from the date of submission of the deadline.
According to Supreme Court sources, the deadline has been served only in the President's Office, Sheetal Niwas and the Prime Minister's Office, Singha Durbar. The deadline has not been served in bodies including Prime Minister Sushila Karki, the Parliament Secretariat and others.
According to the Supreme Court's order, the Supreme Court's custodian in all bodies gets 15 days after submitting the deadline. The Attorney General's Office stated that it took time to submit the written response because the Supreme Court had given seven days and the deadline for submission of the deadline for submission of the deadline is seven days. Written responses submitted to the Supreme Court are forwarded through the Attorney General's Office. The Supreme Court's order also states that they should be submitted through the Attorney General's Office. Since the Constitutional Bench's order states that the written responses should be scheduled for hearing after the opposition bodies send written responses, it seems that the final written response should be received.
In the writ petition against the dissolution, the President's Office, Sheetal Niwas, Prime Minister Sushila Karki, Speaker Devraj Ghimire, the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, and the Parliament Secretariat have been named as respondents. After the written responses of all the opponents are received in the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court, the hearing is scheduled. Since the Constitutional Bench, which also included the Chief Justice, did not order a hearing by fixing a date and did not even give priority, it seems that there was a delay in the procedural time limit.
The Constitutional Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Man Singh Raut, Justices Sapana Pradhan Malla, Kumar Regmi, Hari Prasad Phuyal and Manoj Sharma had ordered that the hearing be held as per the regular procedure despite the petitioner's request for priority and priority in the hearing. The Bench said that the matter sought by the petitioner in the interim order was of a nature that should be considered during the final hearing, and that there was no need to issue an interim order.
Similarly, the Constitutional Bench had ordered on 19 Kartik to seek a written response in the writ petition of Advocate Punya Prasad Khatiwada. In that writ petition, on 12 Kartik, it had also ordered to seek a written response from some of the respondents in a similar dispute, so it had ordered to seek a response from the remaining respondents. Koirala, a spokesperson for the Supreme Court, said that the respondents who received the time limit for both the writ petitions are being served separately.
The writ petition questions the constitutional basis for appointing Sushila Karki as Prime Minister, the President's authority to form the government, the appointment of a former Chief Justice as Prime Minister, the jurisdiction of the electoral government, and the dissolution of the House of Representatives by the interim Prime Minister. Premraj Silwal, Ayush Badal, Bipin Dhakal, and Prakash Bhujel, among others, had approached the Supreme Court. Similarly, Yubaraj Safal, Kirtinath Sharma, Maqbul Miyan, Dak Bahadur Shah, Dambar Prasad Shiwakoti, Dal Bahadur Dhami, Prakash Jung Shah, Bimal Pokharel, and Sher Bahadur Rokaya had filed a writ petition against the dissolution of the House of Representatives.
