KATHMANDU: The Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court has upheld the appointments made through an ordinance four years ago, rejecting the petitions filed against them by a majority decision.

The verdict, issued on Wednesday, dismissed the writ petitions challenging the legitimacy of those appointments.

Justices Sapana Pradhan Malla, Manoj Kumar Sharma, and Kumar Chudal formed the majority that ruled in favor of dismissing the writs.

However, Chief Justice Prakashman Singh Raut and Justice Nahakul Subedi expressed a dissenting opinion, stating that the appointments should be annulled, according to Supreme Court spokesperson Achyut Kuinkel.

With the Chief Justice himself in the minority, the decision was delayed before finally being made public in a 20-page summary order on Wednesday.

The bench had heard the cases over multiple sessions in the earlier phase of proceedings. The final hearing was held on May 15, and a decision was initially scheduled for June 11. However, due to differences in opinion among the justices, the verdict was postponed to July 2.

The controversy stemmed from a constitutional amendment introduced through an ordinance by the then government, which altered the quorum requirement for the Constitutional Council.

Using this revised provision, the Oli-led administration recommended 58 appointments to various constitutional positions in two phases. Of these, six appointees did not accept their posts. The rest began their six-year tenure, but a verdict on their appointments only came in the fifth year.

The first ordinance was issued on December 15, 2020 at the recommendation of then-Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, and was approved by then-President Bidya Devi Bhandari. It recommended 38 names.

A second ordinance was issued on May 4, 2021, recommending 20 more appointments. Petitions filed against both rounds of appointments have now been resolved through this single consolidated verdict, which effectively upholds 52 of the contested appointments.