Kathmandu, Oct 30: The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court has refused to issue an interim order on the writ petitions filed against the formation of the interim government led by Prime Minister Sushila Karki and the dissolution of the House of Representatives.

A five-member bench headed by Chief Justice Prakashman Singh Raut, along with justices Sapana Pradhan Malla, Kumar Regmi, Hari Prasad Phuyal, and Manoj Kumar Sharma, made the decision after a preliminary hearing.

The court has asked the defendants, including the Office of the President and the Office of the Prime Minister, to submit written clarifications within seven days through the Office of the Attorney General.

Sixteen petitioners had approached the court demanding an interim order to stop the implementation of the government’s formation, the dissolution of the House, and the announcement of new elections set for March 5, 2026.

Prime Minister Karki’s interim administration was formed after the September 8–9 Gen Z uprising that ousted the previous government. Soon after taking office, her cabinet recommended dissolving the House of Representatives, which President Ram Chandra Paudel endorsed on September 12. The government then declared a date for fresh polls.

The Constitutional Bench held its first hearing on Wednesday at the Supreme Court’s annex building, as the main complex is still under repair after being damaged by fire during the September 9 unrest.

Due to the arson and vandalism, the court had suspended all but urgent and habeas corpus cases. Regular hearings and new case registrations resumed on October 14, prompting a flood of petitions challenging the government’s dissolution move.

During Wednesday’s session, the justices directed lawyers to focus on whether issuing an interim order was appropriate. Justice Kumar Regmi questioned if such an order should also stall the elections, saying it could paralyze the entire political process.

Justice Sapana Pradhan Malla also raised concerns about the limits and practicality of the order, while other justices shared similar views.

Senior advocate Tikaram Bhattarai and advocate Prem Raj Silwal, representing the petitioners, argued for the reinstatement of the dissolved House of Representatives.

People's News Monitoring Service