Is it just me or this news was hidden from most of us? The interim government (Regmi’s) gave permission to India to establish checkpoints in Lumbini, Pashupati and tighten up security in Tribhuvan Airport. How is this not a matter of big outcry?? Why are we wasting organizing ralleys for idiotic causes (e.g. ralleys by jewellery importers, any Nepal bandhs etc) but are quiet on this particular one? This should be an issue of grave concerns for sovereignty of a nation. Have we just become deaf or are we indifferent because of what else is going on in the nation??? I am glad that the Supreme court gave orders to hold the agreement for now, but why did it happen in the first place? http://www.mysansar.com/2013/0...

Kiddo · Jul 9, 2013 12:34 PM

well, we might have misunderstood it ... http://www.hamrakura.com/10945...

Geology Tiger · Jul 9, 2013 12:44 PM

Thanks for the clarifying post. However, I am trying to understand why we need the immigration check post (isn't that what Adhyagaman post is?) in religious places like Pashupatichhetra and Lumbini? Are we talking about Border control? If not, why should we have those posts there and that to on India's "request?"

Kiddo · Jul 9, 2013 2:39 PM

 मित्र,  पशुपति र लुम्बिनी भनेर धार्मिक क्षेत्र भनिएको हैन, पशुपतिनगर  इलामको दार्जलिङ्ग क्षेत्र जोड्ने नाका र लुम्बिनी अर्थात रुपन्देही जिल्ला को उत्तर प्रदेश जोड्ने नाका भनिएको हो. अध्यागमन चेकपोस्ट बनाइनुले घाटा छैन नाफै हुन्छ, सदुपयोग गर्न सके .    त्यसो त सर्बोच्च अदालत ले यस्तो कुनै सम्झौता नगर्नु न गराउनु भनी अस्ति नै सरकार को नाम मा आदेश जारी गरिसकेकोले यो सम्बन्धी टाउको दुखाइ  गर्नु पर्ने आवश्यकता अब रहेन . 

rahulvai · Jul 9, 2013 3:09 PM

पशुपतिक्षेत्र होइन पशुपतिनगर, इलाम भनेका हुन् | अनि supreme court को registrar भैसकेका पण्डितजी ले मुद्दा हालेका रैचन | येदि गृह मन्त्रालयको पछिल्लो स्पस्टिकरन अनुसार हो भने त कस्तो केटा केटि जस्तो कुरो हो यो pandit ji ko | "Advocate Pandit, who is a former SC registrar, moved the SC on Friday, urging the court to annul those two points in the agreement. Pandit has maintained that points No. 21 and 25 of the agreement are not in the interest of the country. The petitioner has further argued that setting up of immigration checkpoints by any foreign country in the territory of a sovereign country means an attack on its sovereign existence. In his petition, Pandit charges that the Indian side is trying to push its claims on the Nepali territory by establishing immigration check points. “…this is an attempt to create a strong evidence that those places where Indian immigration check points remain are part of the Indian territory,” reads the petition." मैले नबुजेको चै, पशुपतिनगर र लुम्बिनी नजिकै ( भैरहवा- बेलहिया /सुनौली ) मा पहिले देखि नै भन्सार र तेस संगै अध्यागमन कार्यालय पनि छन् , अनि फेरि अर्को किन राख्ने भनेको हो ?

nepalilaure · Jul 9, 2013 3:10 PM

Thanks Rahulvai and Nepalilaure for clarification. I had an inkling that they are referring to the bordering areas and I mentioned in my last post that unless they are referring to the bordering areas it is a matter of concern. I completely showed my ignorance of my own country regarding Pashupatinagar, my fault. Now I am with Nepalilaure, why did the SC registrar took such a step? As much as its a sovereign right of our country to make the policies per our needs, India also has the same right to ask us to tighten up our egress towards the neighbor.

Kiddo · Jul 9, 2013 4:45 PM