The government’s controversial land bill—the Bill to Amend Some Nepal Acts Related to Land, 2025—has come under scrutiny after lawmakers linked some provisions in the legislation to the disputed landholding case of Giribandhu Tea Estate, Jhapa.

Sensing some foul play in the legislation process, cross-party lawmakers have stopped the government’s plan to endorse the bill through the federal parliament.

Despite the opposition to the bill, the government had listed it as a tentative agenda item for the House of Representatives on July 10.

Later, it had to be removed from the agenda after lawmakers, including from the ruling Nepali Congress, strongly objected to certain provisions included in the bill.

A few Congress lawmakers and some from other parties registered amendments to the bill. However, the bill was listed in the tentative agenda without giving the amendment the necessary heed.

Congress General Secretary Bishwa Prakash Sharma objected to the bill when it was listed on the House agenda, stating that it required amendments and building consensus before holding deliberation on it.

It was sent back to the parliamentary committee after lawmakers demanded detailed discussion on it. However, there is no consensus on the legislation, not even within the committee.

The Agriculture, Cooperative, and Natural Resources Committee of the House of Representatives on Sunday started a discussion with the amendment proposers on the bill.

During the discussion, the participating lawmakers who proposed the amendment linked the bill to the Giribandhu Tea Estate.

“Many of the lawmakers who proposed amendments to the bill have linked the bill with the Giribandhu Tea Estate,” said chair of the House committee, Kusum Devi Thapa.

According to her, 32 lawmakers among the 55 amendment proposers have shared their opinions on the bill and the committee aims to complete the discussion on Tuesday.

The erstwhile government of KP Sharma Oli, through a Cabinet decision on April 26, 2021, took a decision allowing land above the legal ceiling to be exchanged and sold.

This allowed the Jhapa-based Giribandhu Tea Estate to swap land exceeding the legal ownership ceiling in any other place within Koshi Province, highlighting the legal implications of the land reforms.

The government decision, which was challenged in the court as policy corruption, was reportedly aimed at using the pricey land to build apartments and other commercial purposes after swapping it with land in a remote part of the same province.

But the constitutional bench, headed by Bishowambar Prasad Shrestha, ruled that Oli’s Cabinet decision contravened Section 12 (C) of the Land Act 1964 and was immature.

The court also ruled against allowing the Tea Estate to swap land exceeding the legal ownership ceiling in any other place within Koshi Province, highlighting the legal implications of the land reforms.

Dilendra Prasad Badu, a Congress lawmaker who is one of the proposers of an amendment to the bill from his party, said that there are ample chances that the land bill could be connected to Giribandhu Tea Estate.

“It is a responsibility of the government to address our suspicion,” Badu told the Post.

The bill to amend the Land Act 1964 has placed the government in an increasingly difficult position. While the prime minister’s party, the CPN-UML, supports the bill, a faction within another major ruling party, Nepali Congress, has stood against the bill’s provision, making the opposition lawmakers’ voice stronger.

On Monday, the House committee of the lower house discussed the bill. During the discussion, lawmaker Lekhnath Dahal of the Maoist Centre accused that specific land-related provisions had been included in the amendment bill, keeping Giribandhu Tea Estate in consideration.

“Sub-clause 4 of Clause 2 of this bill is related to Giribandhu Tea Estate,” Dahal said while speaking in the committee.

In sub-clause (1) of Clause 2 of the bill, by amending Clause 12 of the Land Act 1964, a provision related to ‘sale of land for housing and land business’ has been included.

It is written therein, “Notwithstanding anything written elsewhere in this Act, a company that has obtained permission to conduct housing and land business by Clause (e 1) of Clause 12 shall be allowed to develop land within the specified limits set by a notified order, per prevailing laws, and construct plots or houses or residential units (apartments) on such plots and sell them.”

In the same sub-clause 1 of Clause 2 of the proposed bill, it is mentioned: “…when the company sells houses or residential units (apartments), the land designated for common use by the purchasers of such houses or residential units (apartments) must be registered in such a way that collective ownership of the buyers is established.”

Sher Bahadur Kunwar of the CPN (Unified Socialist) and Madhav Sapkota of the Maoist Centre have also linked a few of its provisions to the Giribandhu Tea Estate.

Congress lawmakers have proposed amending Clause 12 (g) by adding Clause 12 (h), to prohibit land granted for agricultural, industrial, educational, or health purposes from being used for other purposes such as housing or real estate developments, including apartments and housing plots.

Congress General Secretary Sharma and lawmaker Badu have already put forward their views defending their amendment proposal.

For land rights activist Jagat Deuja, adding Clause 12 (h), as proposed by the Congress lawmakers, could address many lawmakers’ doubts about the bill.

UML lawmakers claim that the new bill aims to simplify transferring ownership and issuing land ownership certificates to landless Dalits, squatters, and unmanaged settlers.

Land Management, Cooperatives, and Poverty Alleviation Minister Balram Adhikari urged lawmakers not to misinterpret the land bill, stating that it aims to regulate housing transactions by setting a legal land ownership ceiling.

Responding to questions from the amendment-proposing lawmakers at the House committee on Monday, the minister clarified that the bill explicitly states that no benefits will be granted if the land purchased for housing exceeds legal limits.

Minister Adhikari said the bill allows registered land for housing projects only within 50 ropanis in the Kathmandu Valley, 100 ropanis in the hills, and 20 bighas in the Tarai, per government notice.

“The rumours that the public land will be handed over to companies are misleading interpretations,” Minister Adhikari said.

However, lawmakers from the opposition parties are not convinced of the claims made by the UML leaders.

Upendra Yadav, chairperson of Janata Samajbadi Party-Nepal (JSP-Nepal), is most critical of the land bill.

Speaking in the House on July 24, he alleged that the bill paves the way for deforestation and facilitates land allocation to land mafias.

“The government must prioritise protecting the Chure region and halt deforestation,” Yadav said. “Tarai-Madhesh is facing desertification, which needs to be addressed.”

He accuses the government of planning to allow real estate companies to build buildings and sell them using forest areas.

The government introduced similar provisions through ordinances in January, but these lapsed after failing to gain support in the National Assembly. The same provisions were introduced as a bill in Parliament on May 6.

The government had to drop the land ordinance while endorsing four other ordinances due to JSP-Nepal’s opposition.

The UML-Congress alliance, which has an overwhelming majority in the lower house, is in minority in the upper chamber.