Laws · Analysis

Public transport routes and fares: the federal Act, provincial Acts and a metropolitan Act each give the power to a different body

Possible conflict between lawsMedium confidenceEnacted ActReform recommendation

Section 153(gha) of the federal Motor Vehicles and Transport Management Act 2049 gives the federal Department of Transport Management power to fix routes and public vehicle fares. The Auditor General reports that a provincial transport Act and a metropolitan city's transport Act also give their own bodies power to fix routes and fares in the same area, and that penalties for the same traffic offence differ between federal and provincial law. It recommends a federal transport law that removes the duplication. The Constitution puts national transport policy and national highways on the federal list, provincial highways and transport on the provincial list, and local roads on the local list.

Laws and sections involved

सवारी तथा यातायात व्यवस्था ऐन, २०४९ · Motor Vehicles and Transport Management Act, 1993 s.153(gha)
Our translation: the Department's functions include fixing routes as necessary, considering passenger pressure, in order to run transport services, and fixing the fares of public vehicles running on those routes.
Law Commission consolidated text; authenticated 2049/09/22; the title page lists 11 amending Acts, the latest the Some Nepal Acts Amendment Act 2082 (2082/04/14). Whether the 2075 'Acts to align with the Constitution' amendment changed s.153 was not checked line by line. Official text
नेपालको संविधान · Constitution of Nepal Schedule 5 item 20; Schedule 6 items 12 and 20; Schedule 8 item 11
Our translation: federal list — 'national transport policy, railways and management of national highways'; provincial list — 'provincial highways' and '... trade, business, transport'; local list — 'local roads, rural roads, agricultural roads, irrigation'.
Law Commission Unicode text; Gazette 2072/06/03; amended 2072/11/16 and 2077/03/04. Official text

The apparent issue

Fixing public-transport routes and fares within a province or a city could fall under the federal 'national transport policy', the provincial 'transport' entry or local roads. The 1993 federal Act, written before federalism, still gives the power to a federal department, while later provincial and local Acts claim it for themselves. Which body's decision governs a given route, and whether the federal provision still applies inside provinces, is unclear.

Evidence

In a performance audit of Kathmandu Valley traffic management, the Auditor General found that s.153 of the federal Act gives the Department of Transport Management power to fix routes and fares; the Bagmati Province Motor Vehicles and Transport Management Act 2075 lets the provincial ministry fix public vehicle routes (s.79) and fares (s.110); and the Kathmandu Metropolitan City's Act 2075 gives the city executive the power to fix routes and fares within the city (s.21). It also noted that the federal Act fines traffic-rule breaches Rs 500–10,000 while the provincial Act sets Rs 5,000–25,000 for the same offence, and said laws at all three levels should be reformed in line with the federal system. Office of the Auditor General Ministry of Home Affairs chapter, performance audit of Kathmandu Valley traffic management, para 31, printed p.313 (PDF p.343)
In its Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Transport chapter, the Auditor General set out the constitutional division (national transport policy and national highways federal, provincial highways provincial, local and rural roads local), noted that s.153(gha) gives the Department fare-setting power while provincial transport Acts provide for provincial route and fare setting, and recommended making a federal transport law to remove the duplication and clarify provincial and local roles. Office of the Auditor General Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Transport chapter (Department of Transport Management), para 86, printed pp.385–386 (PDF pp.415–416)
s.153 of the federal Act and the constitutional schedule entries were read in the official texts; the provincial and metropolitan Acts were not opened and are described as the Auditor General reports them. Nepal Law Commission MVTMA PDF p.46; Constitution PDF pp.177, 179, 182

Possible readings

Reading 1: routes and fares inside a province are 'transport' on the provincial list (and city routes may touch local powers), so s.153(gha) no longer applies within provinces except perhaps on national highways and inter-provincial routes; provincial and local Acts govern.
Reading 2: fare-setting is part of 'national transport policy' (federal), and under Art. 57 provincial or local laws inconsistent with federal law are void to the extent of inconsistency, so the federal Department's power continues to prevail where it conflicts.
Reading 3: the power is in practice shared, and the question is one of coordination rather than validity; each body acts on the roads within its own list, with the federal Act applying until a new federal framework law is made.

Why does it matter in practice?

Operators and passengers may face different routes, fares and penalties depending on which authority they deal with, and decisions could be challenged as made by the wrong body. Duplicated work adds cost. The federal Act's pre-federal wording leaves courts and officials to resolve each overlap case by case.

Hypothetical example

Hypothetical: a bus company runs a route that starts inside a metropolitan city and ends in a neighbouring municipality of the same province. The city executive approves one fare, the provincial ministry publishes another, and the federal department's national fare list shows a third. A passenger complains of overcharging; it is unclear which fare is the lawful one.

Possible improvements and trade-offs

Enact a new federal transport framework law that limits federal fare and route powers to national highways and inter-provincial services and sets common standards (the Auditor General's recommendation).
Clear division and fewer disputes; requires agreement with provinces and replacing a large 1993 Act.
Amend s.153(gha) narrowly so it applies only to routes the federal government is responsible for, leaving the rest of the Act in place for now.
Quick and targeted; leaves other overlaps (penalties, licensing, number plates) unresolved.
Use intergovernmental coordination (for example under the Federation, Province and Local Level (Coordination and Inter-relation) Act 2077) to agree a single fare-setting process for metropolitan regions without amending Acts.
Flexible and fast; agreements may not bind courts or survive changes of government.

Questions for legal review

Does fixing intra-provincial and urban public-transport fares fall under the federal 'national transport policy', the provincial 'transport' entry, local roads, or the concurrent lists?
Where s.153(gha) and a provincial Act conflict, which applies under Art. 57 and the Federation, Province and Local Level (Coordination and Inter-relation) Act?
Can a metropolitan city's own Act validly give its executive fare-setting power on roads that are provincial or national highways?

Research status

Researched: 2026-10-12
Confidence: Medium confidence — The federal provision and the constitutional entries were read, and the Auditor General documents the overlapping provincial and metropolitan provisions in two places. Confidence is not high because the provincial and metropolitan Acts themselves were not opened and the constitutional allocation is open to more than one reading.
Review: Not yet reviewed by a qualified lawyer.

Still unresolved

The Bagmati Province Motor Vehicles and Transport Management Act 2075 and the Kathmandu Metropolitan City transport Act 2075 were not opened; their sections are cited as the Auditor General reports them.
Other provinces' transport Acts were not checked.
Whether any federal transport bill is pending was not checked.