Ward chairperson rights dispute, legal discussion in Udayapur.webp "Ward chairperson rights dispute, legal discussion in Udayapur")
Time and context indication
Udayapur, June 2082. Ward-level decision disputed.
Executive decision
It has been confirmed that the executive did not give Keshav Adhikari, the ward chairman of Chaudandigarhi-7, the responsibility of the post. It is said that this decision came from the meeting on April 21, 2082, but Adhikari claims that the information was received only on Sunday. The copy also shows instructions to stop monthly services and facilities and to coordinate the upcoming budget through other members.
Allegations and justification debate
The decision document argues that Adhikari expressed regret by rejecting the statement made by the official at the District Administration Office on April 19, 2082 about the performance of the people's representative. In addition, allegations of not coordinating legally, being absent from meetings, and appointing an acting representative without information are included. The question of whether the reduction of authority is justified on these grounds or not has been raised.
Ward chairman's response
The official says that since he is a people's elected representative, he should receive clear information about what has been done, whether it is suspension, action or reduction of responsibility. He said he would seek legal action, saying he only found out after receiving a copy from the accounting department. He claims that the suspension of service facilities and the loss of office coordination will affect his and the ward's voting rights.
Legal perspective and process
The Local Government Operation Act, procedures, and the principles of natural justice require clear information, showing of reasons, and an opportunity for self-defense in proceedings. The move to take away official responsibilities requires a strict examination of evidence, procedural fairness, and legal rights. If the administrative decision is seen to risk reducing the elected mandate, a judicial review is inevitable.
The way forward and balance
This dispute requires immediate public disclosure of documents, an impartial investigation, and legal remedies. The city leadership should provide an explanation with reasons, and the ward should plan for continuity of work. Transparency, timely information, and participation in the budget process are the basis of trust for the community.
