The petition filed by Hitrendra Dev Shakya against the Executive Director of Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA), Kulman Ghising, did not receive a hearing on Monday. The case was listed as number 12 on the bench of Supreme Court Justices Kumar Regmi and Tek Prasad Dhungana, but it was not heard. Since both judges had individual hearings, the case was postponed with no hearing today.
Shakya has only five days left in his tenure. As the Supreme Court is unlikely to schedule a hearing and give a decision within this short time frame, it seems that Shakya’s return to the authority is now “closed.” Shakya, who had challenged his removal and Ghising’s appointment, had filed the petition in the Supreme Court on August 1, 2021. He had been battling the case for four years, but a decision was never reached by the time he was set to retire.
Shakya feels that the court has been hesitant to make a decision on the case, and he believes that the government’s efforts to remove Ghising have added to the court’s difficulties in resolving the matter. Shakya, who had hoped for a decision, now claims that his petition will be dismissed after his retirement.
Earlier, the court had directed the concerned parties to submit written responses within 15 days, and then schedule a hearing within three days. However, over the course of four years, the case continued to be delayed, and hearing after hearing was postponed.
Shakya had been removed from his position as the Executive Director of NEA in July 2021 and replaced by Kulman Ghising. The new government, led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal, decided to appoint Ghising instead of Shakya. Shakya had been appointed to the post for four years by the KP Sharma Oli government in January 2021. Shakya challenged this decision, claiming it was unlawful to remove him before his tenure had expired. He filed a petition for judicial review, requesting the court to cancel the government’s decision to replace him.
The case went through several hearings, but after delays, no interim orders were issued, and it was not resolved quickly. Shakya had hoped for a swift decision, as he believed the court would act promptly. However, time and again, the hearings were either delayed or did not happen.
Shakya’s tenure as the NEA Executive Director had faced criticism for decreasing profits and rising electricity cuts, which the government cited as reasons for appointing Ghising. After his removal, Shakya was appointed to a special position in the Energy Commission. However, he was dissatisfied with this reassignment and pursued the matter in court, claiming his removal was done in an insulting manner.
