In a rare incident in Nepal, The Himalayan Times’ bank accounts have been frozen and share transactions halted after the management failed to clear staff dues despite court order, affecting the two-and-a-half-decade-old national English daily.

The Labour and Employment Office, Teku, has frozen the bank accounts and share transactions of the management of The Himalayan Times daily, operated by International Media Network Nepal Pvt. Ltd., after it failed to pay dues owed to employees as per a Labour Court ruling.

The office has separately written to Nepal Rastra Bank and the Office of the Company Registrar, instructing them to freeze all banking transactions and all share-related activities, including buying, selling, and transferring the company's shares.

According to the Chief of the Labour and Employment Office, Uday Kumar Gopal, the Labour Court ruled in favour of the complainant, Anuj Arora, on December 7 last year, in a case between Arora and International Media Network. Since the company repeatedly ignored requests to pay the amount as per the verdict, the office took action under Section 167(2) of the Labour Act, 2017.

“On the basis of the petition filed by the complainant stating that the court verdict had not been implemented, we initiated this process,” Gopal told Kantipur. “The process had been ongoing for over a year, and finally, after the verdict was not implemented, we wrote to freeze the bank accounts and shares.”

On May 4, the office also wrote to the Banking and Financial Institutions Regulation Department of Nepal Rastra Bank, requesting the freezing of all accounts held under the name of International Media Network Nepal Pvt. Ltd. across the country.

Similarly, a letter sent to the Office of the Company Registrar instructed that all share transactions, including buying, selling, transferring, or any other business activities of the media house, remain suspended until the court verdict is fully implemented.

Arora, who has been working at the newspaper since 2003, was appointed news editor on July 17, 2008. He said the company reduced salaries by 50 percent from March 2020 to December 2022, citing COVID-19. The daily newspaper was launched in 2001.

In a complaint lodged at the Department of Labour, Arora has claimed while he was paid partially between mid-March 2020 and December 2022, no salary was paid for a month, from mid-October to mid-November 2022. “No salary was paid for two months and 14 days starting mid-December,” reads the complaint.

After salaries stopped, Arora messaged editorial advisor Joseph Nathan on WhatsApp at 6:39 pm on Feburary 27, 2023. “Boss, I can’t work till you pay. And you owe me Rs 2 million.”

Even after six months without response, Arora sent an official letter on September 3, 2023, demanding Rs 2,651,146, including interest and compensation. The company did not respond.

He later said the company’s accounts chief, Prabha Shankar, called him on September 27, 2023 and asked him to wait at least two more months for payment.

After being repeatedly delayed without payment, Arora decided to pursue legal action and informed the company via email on the same day that he would begin legal proceedings. He then filed a complaint with the Labour and Employment Office on September 30, 2023.

Following the complaint, the Labour and Employment Office ruled in his favour on June 19, 2024. However, the company continued to delay implementation.

On December 7 last year, a new order was issued, directing the company to pay Rs2,000,555 to Arora, based on the Labour Court decision.

Following the newspaper’s management's continued reluctance to comply with the court ruling, he again filed an application on January 22, demanding enforcement of the order and the freezing of assets.

Meanwhile, the company approached the Supreme Court on March 22 seeking a stay on enforcement. However, the Supreme Court refused to issue the order as demanded.

In its ruling, a division bench of Justices Sapana Pradhan Malla and Balkrishna Dhakal stated: “Considering the nature of the applicant’s work and the fact that he has been continuously working since 2003, the applicant appears to be in regular employment under Section 10(1)(a) of the Labour Act, 2017, rather than consultancy-based employment.”

Even after the Supreme Court opened the way for enforcement, the company again filed a petition with the Labour Office on April 24, claiming the case was still under consideration.

When contacted for comment, Managing Director Robin Lama said the case is sub judice in the Supreme Court and that the company will act in accordance with the final verdict.

“The case is currently under consideration at the Supreme Court, and the company will act according to its final decision,” he told Kantipur. He didnot respond to the query as to why the company was delaying enforcement of the court orders.