Kathmandu, December 17:

Chief Justice Kedar Prasad Giri was yet to receive a show cause notice of the Supreme Court which seeks explanation from the chairman and the members of the Constitutional Council on why the SC order is not required to promulgate Constitutional Council Procedural Act before making appointments in constitutional bodies.

The apex court on November 27 had sought explanation from the Chairman and the members of the Constitutional Council after the initial hearing on a writ petition which demanded the apex court order in this regard. The Chief Justice, who is an ex-officio member of the Constitutional Council, is a defendant in the writ petition.

“Though Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, ex-officio chairman of the Council, and the other ex-officio members have received the court order and ex-officio member and Law Minister has already submitted his explanation to the SC, the Chief Justice himself is yet to receive the order,” a source at the SC told this daily today.

According to the source, SC notice server Krishna Giri had met Chief Justice Giri to serve the notice but the Chief Justice had declined to accept it. Then the notice server forwarded the notice to the chief of the Cause Section Shree Kanta Paudel for his help.

A single bench of Justice Kalyan Shrestha had issued the order.

The bench issued show cause notice to the PM, Prime Minister’s Office and Cabinet, the Chief Justice, members of the constitutional council, the Speaker of the Legislature-Parliament, the Deputy Minister, the Foreign Minister and the Law and Justice Minister. The bench had asked the defendants to submit their explanation in 15 days.

Chief of the Cause Section Paudel, however, said Chief Justice Giri had asked them to prepare his written explanation to submit to the bench. “The CJ is ready to submit his explanation. The SC notice meant for him is with me,” he added.

Advocates Madhav Kumar Basnet, Lokdhoj Thapa and Binod Phuyal had filed the petition demanding the apex court order to prevent the appointment in constitutional bodies without the promulgation of the Act.

The petitioner argued that the Act regarding the governance of constitutional council was required as per Article of 149 of the Interim Constitution.