Baluwatar Land Case[ Fact Sheet]
Baluwatar Land Case[ Fact Sheet]
Rabindra Dhungel
Lila Mani Poudel . Recently, the news was published in newspapers and social media with a long list of cases related to the Baluwatar land issue and my name was also mentioned.
1) With the approval of Departmental Minister Chandra Dev Joshi from the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management on 9 Shrawan, 2069, then Secretary of the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management Dinesh Shahri Adhikari signed the agreement. The proposal has been registered in the Council of Ministers.
2) As the decision of the Government of Nepal on 14 Shrawan 2069 has decided to appoint me to the post of Chief Secretary, I had assumed the office of Chief Secretary on 16 Shrawan. When I assumed the office of the Chief Secretary, the proposal from the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management did not reach the level of law. After being registered (submitted) to the Council of Ministers, the proposal is the property of the Council of Ministers, and whatever the Council of Ministers decides, the Chief Secretary sends the decision to the Secretary who submits the proposal. He has no right to do anything other than that. The law has entrusted the Chief Secretary with the task of registering the proposal (submitting it in legal language) after seeing that the process of performance and division of labor regulations has not been completed in the proposal coming to the Council of Ministers and the proposal has not been received from the Ministry in the proposed format. The Chief Secretary can and should stop a proposal that does not have to come to the Council of Ministers as per the Performance Rules and is not allowed to be brought by the concerned Ministry as per the Division of Labor Rules. If not stopped, legal liability should be borne. However, the Chief Secretary cannot do anything without the decision of the Council of Ministers on the proposal made in accordance with the Performance Rules and Division of Labor Rules. The Chief Secretary does not have any right to add, understand, give or give evidence.
3) Among those registered in the Council of Ministers, I have to send a copy of all the proposals directed by the Prime Minister to all the Ministers 24 hours in advance at the time and place specified by the Prime Minister to discuss the agenda as directed by the Prime Minister. Notice of the meeting to be held on the 17th and the agenda to be discussed in the meeting on the 17th of Shrawan.
4) The meeting of the Council of Ministers on J17 shrawan (the first meeting after the appointment of the Chief Secretary) considered the proposal as detailed and sent it to the Social Committee of the Council of Ministers. After the Secretary of the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management presented the justification and legal basis of the proposal, the Social Committee held a detailed discussion. As the decision to submit the proposal has been sent to the Council of Ministers and the meeting of the Council of Ministers held in the third week of September on the basis of the recommendation of the Social Committee decided to give in-principle consent to the proposal to the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management. That is all that has been done.
5) I had no recollection of this proposal as there were more than 2,000 proposals during the tenure of the Chief Secretary and an average of 20 per week. I have found the facts while searching after the dispute. Law and practice have nothing to do with that proposal and decision. It is neither my right nor my duty to influence that decision. Since the procedural and legal obligations of the Chief Secretary to register the proposal have already been completed before I became the Chief Secretary, I have nothing to do with it. After the proposal was included in the agenda of the cabinet meeting as per the directive of the Prime Minister, the cabinet meeting decided to have a detailed discussion on the proposal in the social committee of the cabinet. After the Secretary of the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management approved the proposal, the committee agreed with the proposal of the Ministry and decided to give in-principle approval to the recommendation of the committee. Or trying to persecute or accuse, is a direct mockery of revenge, prejudice and the rule of law. Even more surprising is the fact that some of the participants in the discussion and decision-making process of the above proposal have not been asked a single word, let alone prosecuted. However, trying to convict me for not even participating in the process confirms that it is a malicious and deliberate attempt to tarnish my image, tarnish my public image and humiliate me.
6) When the Ministry prepares a proposal and sends it to the Council of Ministers to correct the registration in the name of the three ropani 9 ana land guthi, or when the decision is taken by the Council of Ministers, someone has prepared wrong details with bad intentions. Or if someone has been given unfair advantage, such person should be punished.However, according to what I have read in the newspapers, after the in-principle decision was made in the proposal to correct the registration, it is mentioned that the fisherman took some land by setting up a fisherman on the three ropani 9 ana land. In that case, it is necessary to take action against those who have taken advantage of it, but here I am surprised to see that I am not aware of it and I do not have the responsibility and status to find out in terms of position and I am not involved.
7) Sometimes I get the impression that some of my friends are under the illusion that the decision taken by the ministry is to be taken to the Council of Ministers to avoid action and to make it a policy, and this is a similar proposal. I have signed dozens of proposals in a week and more than two thousand in my tenure, but I have not signed a single one on the authority of the ministry. I still remember many of the proposals that pressured me to make a decision on the jurisdiction of the ministry and which I did not accept. I was well aware that because I was an obstacle to the interests of many people, if I did or should not do what I should not do for personal gain or the law, my social life would be ended by finding such mistakes for the rest of my life. Therefore, after enduring a lot of sacrifice, dedication, humiliation and suffering, he bound himself in extreme discipline and served the country and the people faithfully by putting honesty and morality above all else. There is a suspicion that there has been no planned attempt to humiliate me by forcing me to plead guilty in a case where I have not committed any wrongdoing and have acted honestly with patriotism.
8) If the decision is made by bringing it to the Council of Ministers to avoid action and formulate a policy, then it is both the responsibility and obligation of the Chief Secretary. If I have deliberately participated in such work, I must and will take responsibility for it. In such a situation, the Chief Secretary along with the decision maker is also weak, but the Chief Secretary cannot and should not take responsibility for any decision within the jurisdiction of the Council of Ministers. Our cabinet system has been in place since 2014. To date, there has not been a single instance of the Chief Secretary being found guilty of any decision within the jurisdiction of the Council of Ministers.
Where there is no authority, there is no accountability. The proposal mentioned in the context is that only the Council of Ministers can decide. I have also heard some other friends in the media argue that the Chief Secretary should have taken the initiative to send the proposal to the concerned committee of the Council of Ministers for a detailed discussion. I would like to inform those friends that the proposal has been sent to the concerned committee. The meeting made the decision in principle by repeating the recommendation of the committee one more level and keeping it in the full meeting of the Council of Ministers. Nowhere in the decision-making process has there been any negligence, short-sightedness, exemption or weakness.
According to media reports, the ministry failed to collect evidence from the lower echelons and analyze the facts, and the ministry had to prove the wrong documents to be correct. The true investigation had to find out who was involved in this case and who was not. The law has assigned the responsibility of collecting and verifying the evidence in the above case to the concerned ministry. I also heard some people say that Leelamani should have stopped this proposal. If they were the ones who had already registered in the Council of Ministers before I became the Chief Secretary, how could they have stopped it? Once the proposal is registered, no one but the Council of Ministers can do anything. Whatever is decided will be done by the Council of Ministers. After the proposal, which was registered before my appointment, went to the Social Committee of the Council of Ministers and was decided in the presence of half a dozen secretaries, there was no work left for the Chief Secretary to do. It was heard that some of them had once proposed to withdraw from the Council of Ministers and the decision should have been considered. However, in the past, the decision was not returned on the pretext of a decision, but because the cabinet was dissolved without a decision on the proposal. When I spoke to the then departmental minister, he said that the proposal was forwarded after the implementation order unit pointed out the court order.
The proposal was not only sent to the Social Committee as it was an old, complicated and court case once it reached the Council of Ministers. . Those issues must have been raised during the discussion in the Social Committee of the Council of Ministers, but I was not convinced. If I had been informed within three years of the decision that someone had erred in that decision, I would have taken the initiative to correct the decision myself and take action against the culprit.
Rabindra Dhungel
Lila Mani Poudel . Recently, the news was published in newspapers and social media with a long list of cases related to the Baluwatar land issue and my name was also mentioned.
1) With the approval of Departmental Minister Chandra Dev Joshi from the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management on 9 Shrawan, 2069, then Secretary of the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management Dinesh Shahri Adhikari signed the agreement. The proposal has been registered in the Council of Ministers.
2) As the decision of the Government of Nepal on 14 Shrawan 2069 has decided to appoint me to the post of Chief Secretary, I had assumed the office of Chief Secretary on 16 Shrawan. When I assumed the office of the Chief Secretary, the proposal from the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management did not reach the level of law. After being registered (submitted) to the Council of Ministers, the proposal is the property of the Council of Ministers, and whatever the Council of Ministers decides, the Chief Secretary sends the decision to the Secretary who submits the proposal. He has no right to do anything other than that. The law has entrusted the Chief Secretary with the task of registering the proposal (submitting it in legal language) after seeing that the process of performance and division of labor regulations has not been completed in the proposal coming to the Council of Ministers and the proposal has not been received from the Ministry in the proposed format. The Chief Secretary can and should stop a proposal that does not have to come to the Council of Ministers as per the Performance Rules and is not allowed to be brought by the concerned Ministry as per the Division of Labor Rules. If not stopped, legal liability should be borne. However, the Chief Secretary cannot do anything without the decision of the Council of Ministers on the proposal made in accordance with the Performance Rules and Division of Labor Rules. The Chief Secretary does not have any right to add, understand, give or give evidence.
3) Among those registered in the Council of Ministers, I have to send a copy of all the proposals directed by the Prime Minister to all the Ministers 24 hours in advance at the time and place specified by the Prime Minister to discuss the agenda as directed by the Prime Minister. Notice of the meeting to be held on the 17th and the agenda to be discussed in the meeting on the 17th of Shrawan.
4) The meeting of the Council of Ministers on J17 shrawan (the first meeting after the appointment of the Chief Secretary) considered the proposal as detailed and sent it to the Social Committee of the Council of Ministers. After the Secretary of the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management presented the justification and legal basis of the proposal, the Social Committee held a detailed discussion. As the decision to submit the proposal has been sent to the Council of Ministers and the meeting of the Council of Ministers held in the third week of September on the basis of the recommendation of the Social Committee decided to give in-principle consent to the proposal to the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management. That is all that has been done.
5) I had no recollection of this proposal as there were more than 2,000 proposals during the tenure of the Chief Secretary and an average of 20 per week. I have found the facts while searching after the dispute. Law and practice have nothing to do with that proposal and decision. It is neither my right nor my duty to influence that decision. Since the procedural and legal obligations of the Chief Secretary to register the proposal have already been completed before I became the Chief Secretary, I have nothing to do with it. After the proposal was included in the agenda of the cabinet meeting as per the directive of the Prime Minister, the cabinet meeting decided to have a detailed discussion on the proposal in the social committee of the cabinet. After the Secretary of the Ministry of Land Reforms and Management approved the proposal, the committee agreed with the proposal of the Ministry and decided to give in-principle approval to the recommendation of the committee. Or trying to persecute or accuse, is a direct mockery of revenge, prejudice and the rule of law. Even more surprising is the fact that some of the participants in the discussion and decision-making process of the above proposal have not been asked a single word, let alone prosecuted. However, trying to convict me for not even participating in the process confirms that it is a malicious and deliberate attempt to tarnish my image, tarnish my public image and humiliate me.
6) When the Ministry prepares a proposal and sends it to the Council of Ministers to correct the registration in the name of the three ropani 9 ana land guthi, or when the decision is taken by the Council of Ministers, someone has prepared wrong details with bad intentions. Or if someone has been given unfair advantage, such person should be punished.However, according to what I have read in the newspapers, after the in-principle decision was made in the proposal to correct the registration, it is mentioned that the fisherman took some land by setting up a fisherman on the three ropani 9 ana land. In that case, it is necessary to take action against those who have taken advantage of it, but here I am surprised to see that I am not aware of it and I do not have the responsibility and status to find out in terms of position and I am not involved.
7) Sometimes I get the impression that some of my friends are under the illusion that the decision taken by the ministry is to be taken to the Council of Ministers to avoid action and to make it a policy, and this is a similar proposal. I have signed dozens of proposals in a week and more than two thousand in my tenure, but I have not signed a single one on the authority of the ministry. I still remember many of the proposals that pressured me to make a decision on the jurisdiction of the ministry and which I did not accept. I was well aware that because I was an obstacle to the interests of many people, if I did or should not do what I should not do for personal gain or the law, my social life would be ended by finding such mistakes for the rest of my life. Therefore, after enduring a lot of sacrifice, dedication, humiliation and suffering, he bound himself in extreme discipline and served the country and the people faithfully by putting honesty and morality above all else. There is a suspicion that there has been no planned attempt to humiliate me by forcing me to plead guilty in a case where I have not committed any wrongdoing and have acted honestly with patriotism.
8) If the decision is made by bringing it to the Council of Ministers to avoid action and formulate a policy, then it is both the responsibility and obligation of the Chief Secretary. If I have deliberately participated in such work, I must and will take responsibility for it. In such a situation, the Chief Secretary along with the decision maker is also weak, but the Chief Secretary cannot and should not take responsibility for any decision within the jurisdiction of the Council of Ministers. Our cabinet system has been in place since 2014. To date, there has not been a single instance of the Chief Secretary being found guilty of any decision within the jurisdiction of the Council of Ministers.
Where there is no authority, there is no accountability. The proposal mentioned in the context is that only the Council of Ministers can decide. I have also heard some other friends in the media argue that the Chief Secretary should have taken the initiative to send the proposal to the concerned committee of the Council of Ministers for a detailed discussion. I would like to inform those friends that the proposal has been sent to the concerned committee. The meeting made the decision in principle by repeating the recommendation of the committee one more level and keeping it in the full meeting of the Council of Ministers. Nowhere in the decision-making process has there been any negligence, short-sightedness, exemption or weakness.
According to media reports, the ministry failed to collect evidence from the lower echelons and analyze the facts, and the ministry had to prove the wrong documents to be correct. The true investigation had to find out who was involved in this case and who was not. The law has assigned the responsibility of collecting and verifying the evidence in the above case to the concerned ministry. I also heard some people say that Leelamani should have stopped this proposal. If they were the ones who had already registered in the Council of Ministers before I became the Chief Secretary, how could they have stopped it? Once the proposal is registered, no one but the Council of Ministers can do anything. Whatever is decided will be done by the Council of Ministers. After the proposal, which was registered before my appointment, went to the Social Committee of the Council of Ministers and was decided in the presence of half a dozen secretaries, there was no work left for the Chief Secretary to do. It was heard that some of them had once proposed to withdraw from the Council of Ministers and the decision should have been considered. However, in the past, the decision was not returned on the pretext of a decision, but because the cabinet was dissolved without a decision on the proposal. When I spoke to the then departmental minister, he said that the proposal was forwarded after the implementation order unit pointed out the court order.
The proposal was not only sent to the Social Committee as it was an old, complicated and court case once it reached the Council of Ministers. . Those issues must have been raised during the discussion in the Social Committee of the Council of Ministers, but I was not convinced. If I had been informed within three years of the decision that someone had erred in that decision, I would have taken the initiative to correct the decision myself and take action against the culprit.
