Supreme Court Overturns Mandatory 20-Metre Setback along Riverbanks

The Supreme Court has overturned a provision requiring an additional 20-metre setback along riverbanks as a condition for map approval and construction permits.

Hearing a review petition filed by the Government of Nepal, the court ruled that the earlier verdict by a joint bench mandating the additional setback was, to that extent, neither lawful nor justifiable.

In a brief order issued on Sunday, a bench comprising Justices Sunil Kumar Pokharel, Bal Krishna Dhakal and Nripadhwaj Niraula partially overturned the earlier ruling. The court held that, for the Bagmati River and its tributaries, only the standards set by the Cabinet in 2008–09 would apply, and that an additional mandatory 20-metre buffer could not be enforced.

The court said it would take time to prepare the full text of the verdict.

Earlier, a division bench of the Supreme Court had ordered that an additional 20 metres on both sides of the Bagmati River and its tributaries be declared a prohibited construction zone. The order barred new structures within that area and allowed the government to acquire land with compensation if necessary. Following the review decision, that provision will no longer be implemented.

The case originated from two writ petitions filed in 2010–11 and 2011–12 by Prakash Mani Sharma and others of the Janahit Sanrakshan Manch, seeking protection of the Bagmati River and its tributaries in their natural state.

On December 19, 2023, a bench of justices Anand Mohan Bhattarai and Binod Sharma had issued a mandamus order directing the government to control pollution, remove encroachments, demarcate river flow, manage sewage and waste, address squatter settlements, and protect green areas. The 95-page full verdict also called for strict enforcement of standards related to house construction along riverbanks.

However, a paragraph in the full text, made public in mid-July 2024, sparked widespread debate and controversy. Although houses already built on private land with approved maps were not to be demolished, land within the 20-metre zone was to be frozen, with restrictions on new construction and even the sale and purchase of such property.

These provisions triggered protests, signature campaigns and mounting pressure on the government from affected residents.

The government also concluded that enforcing the order, including vacating riverbanks through compensation, would impose a massive financial burden. The Prime Minister’s Office subsequently formed a task force to study the implementation of the 20-metre standard. After the task force concluded that the order was impractical to enforce, the government filed a review petition at the Supreme Court. The petition was registered by Prime Minister’s Office Secretary Phanindra Gautam.

In its submission, the government presented economic, social and legal arguments, stating that around 8,300 houses and sheds, 30,000 ropanis of land, and nearly 42,000 people would be at risk of displacement. It estimated that acquiring land and structures would cost around Rs 2126 billion, equivalent to the country’s total capital expenditure over seven years.

The government further argued that houses and land pledged as collateral to banks and financial institutions would be put at risk, citizens could be rendered homeless, and social imbalance could emerge. It also raised concerns over the separation of powers, stating that setting standards for rivers and streams falls within the jurisdiction of the executive.