Writ Filed at Patan High Court Over Ncell Share Deal Telecom Regulation; Raises Equality and Policy Concerns in Telecom Sector
बैशाख २४, २०८३ १७:४१
Kathmandu. A public interest writ has been filed at the Patan High Court challenging a series of government decisions related to the purchase and sale of shares of Ncell, as well as broader regulatory practices in Nepal’s telecommunications sector.
The writ, filed by advocate Ganesh Adhikari, seeks the annulment of decisions taken by the government, including the implementation of a report prepared by an investigation committee formed to examine the Ncell share transaction.
The petition names multiple respondents, including the Government of Nepal, the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, the Nepal Telecommunications Authority, and WorldLink Communications Limited.
The controversy stems from the government-formed committee led by former Auditor General Tanka Mani Sharma Dangal on 7 December, 2023 to investigate the sale of Ncell shares. The petitioner has challenged Cabinet decisions dated 18 February 2024 and 29 August 2024 that implemented the committee’s findings.
The report, recently made public, raised serious legal concerns surrounding the transaction. It stated that prior regular, mandatory under prevailing telecommunications laws, had not been obtained for the sale of 100 per cent shares of Reynolds Holdings Limited, Ncell’s Holding Company. The report also raised questions about the buyer’s financial, technical, and managerial capacity.
A committee was subsequently formed to conduct a detailed study and investigation into the matter. The writ challenges the government decisions and official correspondence issued during the implementation of the report.
The report further revealed that Ncell violated prevailing laws by failing to obtain prior approval from the authority for the purchase and sale of its shares, and concerns that the buyer lacked financial, technical, and managerial capacity to handle transactions worth billions of rupees.
The writ also challenges the government’s decision allowing Ncell to pay its license renewal fee of Rs 20 billion in four installments over five years, with an annual interest rate of 10 per cent.
The petitioner argues that this arrangement is discriminatory when compared to Nepal Telecom, which was reportedly allowed to pay its renewal fees in installments without interest. According to the petition, the differing treatment violates the constitutional right to equality. It further claims that imposing additional financial burdens on a foreign-invested company contradicts Nepal’s international commitments to ensure equal treatment of domestic and foreign investors.
Dispute over Renewal Fees and Equal Level Playing Field
The petition alleges that the state treated Nepal Telecommunications Company Limited (Nepal Telecom) and Ncell differently regarding the payment of renewal fees. While Nepal Telecom was reportedly permitted to pay its renewal fee of Rs 2 billion in installments, the petitioner claims that similar terms were not extended to Ncell, violating the principle of an “equal level playing field.”
The petitioner argues that such differential treatment by the state and regulatory authorities violates the right to equality guaranteed under Article 18 of the Constitution. The writ further claims that imposing additional conditions, including interest and penalties, on a foreign-invested company like Ncell, contradicts Nepal’s international commitments to ensure equal treatment of investors.
In response, the Nepal Telecommunications Authority, the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, and other respondents have submitted written statements to the court. In its response, the Nepal Telecommunications Authority stated that obtaining prior approval for share transactions is a mandatory legal requirement and that it retains the authority to take action in cases of non-compliance.
The Authority further stated that Section 20 of the Telecommunications Act, 2053, empowers the Government of Nepal to issue necessary policy directives related to the development, expansion, and regulation of telecommunications services, and that complying with such directives is its legal obligation.
The NTA stated that it had merely implemented decisions of the Council of Ministers regarding the execution of the investigation committee’s report on Ncell share transaction, along with directives issued by the ministry, and that such actions fall within its legal responsibilities. The Authority argued that it continues to function within the framework of prevailing laws and that adherence to government directives does not amount to interference with its autonomy.
In its response submitted by the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, it is stated that matters such as telecom regulation, foreign investment management, and license renewal fall under administrative and policy domains. It argued that decisions, including allowing Ncell to pay renewal fees in installments, were made to promote and protect foreign investment in line with broader state policy objectives.
The Ministry of Communication and Information Technology also stated that the NTA is an autonomous regulatory body established to systematically regulate the telecommunications sector, and that activitiessuch as issuing, renewing, and amending licenses fall with its mandate under existing laws.
The government further argued that its decisions were made within the authority granted by prevailing laws, did not violate any fundamental or legal rights of the petitioner, and therefore, the writ should be dismissed.
The writ, registered on 10 March 2026, has already gone through two rounds of hearings. The court has issued a show-cause order, and the process of evidence submission is ongoing. The next hearing is scheduled for 13 May 2026.
Serious Allegations over Worldlink’s Free Wi-Fi Service
The petition also names WorldLink Communications Limited as a respondent, raising concerns over the nature of its services. The petitioner alleges that, despite holding a fixed broadband license, WorldLink has been illegally providing mobility-type services.
According to the petition, while operators such as Ncell and Nepal Telecom provide mobility services after paying substantial fees for frequency and unified licenses, WorldLink has been offering similar services under the guise of free Wi-Fi, allegedly resulting in significant revenue losses for the state.
The petitioner has requested the court to issue an immediate order to shut down such Wi-Fi hotspots and initiate an investigation, arguing that the regulator has remained a “silent spectator”, thereby encouraging corruption.
WorldLink, however, has rejected the allegations, stating that its services are being provided in accordance with regulatory provisions approved for Wi-Fi hotspot operations. It argued that this is not a mobility service but merely an extension of internet services.
“On the whole, reading the writ petition gives the impression that it is motivated by the intention to protect Ncell’s interests by misusing a matter of public concern. If Ncell’s interests had been affected, Ncell itself could have brought the writ petition before the honourable court, and there was no reason preventing it from doing so,” WorldLink stated in its written response.
WorldLink further argued that the petition does not constitute a genuine matter of public interest and requested that it be dismissed.
The petitioner, however, claims that the case concerns the broader telecommunications sector and consumer interest rather than any individual company. Meanwhile, Ncell, in its own written response, stated that it has no meaningful connection with the petitioner. However, the company acknowledged that it had been subjected to discriminatory treatment by the regulator and said it had already submitted a similar request to the government. Ncell also sought dismissal of the writ, arguing that the petitioner’s legal rights have not been violated.
पछिल्लो अध्यावधिक: बैशाख २४, २०८३ १७:४१
