After a hearing on a writ petition filed by advocate Om Prakash Aryal, a single bench of Justice Ram Kumar Prasad Shah ordered the defendants to furnish clarification in writing within 15 days as to why Karki was appointed as the CIAA chief. [break]Justice Shah has also called the writ petitioner and the defendants on May 26 to discuss if the court should stay the appointment as demanded by the petitioner.
Advocate Aryal on Sunday had moved the apex court following appointment of Karki as the chief commissioner of CIAA by the government. The writ petitioner has urged the SC to scrap the government´s decision to appoint Karki as CIAA chief and to stop him from working as the CIAA chief until the court´s final verdict.
Advocate Aryal has claimed that the appointment is “unconstitutional” and also against an earlier SC order. He has argued that Karki lacks the mandatory 20-year experience and is hence incompetent for the post. Aryal has maintained that the CC recommendation is also against the 11-point agreement, which states that the Interim Election Council, which has been formed only to hold fresh polls, will not take any decision with long-term impact.
The writ petitioner has also urged the SC to issue an order prohibiting individuals involved in suppressing mass movement or human rights violations to occupy public office.
Amid strong objections from various quarters, President Ram Baran Yadav on May 9 had appointed Karki as the CIAA chief as per recommendation made by the Constitutional Council (CC).
SC registrar Lohit Chandra Shah on May 6 had ordered the apex court administration to return the writ petition, stating that the apex court will take a decision regarding the issue only when the petitioner moves the court after completing due procedures.
A special bench of Justices Kalyan Shrestha, Girish Chandra Lal and Sushila Karki on December 20, 2012 had ordered that a PIL petitioner should first file an application before the authority or institution concerned. If the issue is not addressed the petitioner can file a writ petition with evidence that the issue in question was not addressed by the concerned authority.
A division bench of Justices Lal and Tarka Raj Bhatta had stated on April 29 that there cannot be any dispute that a recommendation by the CC for appointment to a post should be based on Article 119 (5) of the Interim Constitution and Clause 5 of the Constitutional Council (Functions, Duties, Powers and Procedures) Act, 2066.
The president´s office, Chairman of the Interim Election Council Khil Raj Regmi, CC, CIAA and Karki have been made defendants in the writ petition.
Related story
SC issues show cause order on writ petition filed against gover...
