The recently released full-text of the verdict issued on March 16, 2011 regarding a dispute over the construction of an over-head bridge states that PAC´s intervention into the case has violated the Constituent Assembly (Operation of the Legislature-Parliament) Regulations 2065 BS.[break]
The verdict issued by a joint bench of the apex court nullified the order issued by the PAC on January 5, 2011 to revoke all the agreements between the Kathmandu Metropolitan City Office with Innovative Concept, a private construction company, to build 12 over-head bridges in the capital.
The verdict in its full-text invalidated a couple of claims made by PAC regarding its jurisdiction. It says that PAC can not overstep its jurisdiction which as per the CA regulations is limited to acting on the reports of the Auditor General´s Office and other relevant government reports.
The apex court has invalidated PAC´s claim that its decision necessarily means the decision of parliament.
“PAC´s claim that the committee is an integral part of parliament and its decisions are the decisions of parliament is not valid as per the article 60 of the interim constitution,” says the verdict.
“The PAC could not furnish a satisfactory answer regarding its decision to revoke the agreement,” it says.
Likewise, the verdict says that PAC´s decision to revoke the agreement while a petition on the same issue filed by the Commission for Investigation of the Abuse of Authority (CIAA) was sub-judice at the apex court also violated the spirit of article 60 of the Interim Constitution.
“The decision is invalid as the issue does not fall under PAC´s jurisdiction,” the verdict says.
Also referring to the parliamentary body´s arbitrary decisions, the apex court in its verdict says that no decision, no matter what its intentions, can be legitimate if it does not fall within its jurisdiction.
Related story
SC again tells CIAA don't overstep jurisdiction
