Kathmandu, Jan 18: In the hearing that took place today on the writ petition filed against the decision of the government to dissolve the House of Representatives (HoR), senior advocate Dinmani Pokharel argued that it was not right of the Prime Minister to dissolve the HoR where he faced no obstruction.

Since the Prime Minister had run the government successfully for two years, the parliament could not be dissolved for no reason, he said while pleading on behalf of the writ petitioners. " The HoR was dissolved a week before it was scheduled to meet, while some ordinances were introduced. This is not just," he said.

The act showed that the Prime Minister was not accountable to the parliament. Furthermore, there was no point of arguing that it was a political decision. "The arguments in the Prime Minister's written response to the court are not valid," Pokharel argued.

Also pleading on behalf of the petitioners, advocate Saroj Krishna Ghimire said the Constitution does not give the Prime Minister the authority to dissolve the HoR. The decision to dissolve the house cannot take place with the lone decision of the leader of the ruling party's parliamentary party.

Pleading on the matter of contention began today after the constitutional bench led by Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher JB Rana on Friday decided to continue the hearing in the bench itself. The decision was taken in response to an application by the majority of the petitioners calling for a hearing in an extended full bench of the apex court.

Hearing before the Constitutional bench had begun on December 26, with a focus on whether to hear the matter at the constitutional bench or the extended full bench.

The hearing will continue Tuesday. The bench led by CJ Rana comprises justices Biswambhar Prasad Shrestha, Anil Kumar Sinha, Sapana Malla and Tej Bahadur KC.