Political Influence and Middlemen Dominate Nepal Electricity Authority After Kulman Ghising’s Removal

After the government removed Kulman Ghising from the position of Managing Director of the Nepal Electricity Authority (NEA) — reportedly due to his aggressive drive to recover billions in unpaid electricity dues from influential business groups — the institution has seen a resurgence of middlemen’s dominance, according to multiple internal and ministry sources.

Ghising, credited with ending the country’s long years of load-shedding and steering the NEA towards profitability, was replaced in March by Hitendra Dev Shakya. The appointment, insiders claim, was heavily influenced by political networks and business interests rather than purely merit-based considerations.

Middlemen Networks and Political Bargaining
Reports suggest that prior to Ghising’s removal, middlemen had already begun lobbying for candidates who would serve their interests. With the NEA under the Ministry of Energy, Water Resources and Irrigation — currently held by the Nepali Congress — various names emerged, including Dr. Mukesh Kafle and Prabal Adhikari.

The appointment process allegedly turned into a high-stakes bargaining game involving powerful groups. One camp, led by Deepak Bhatt, pushed for former secretary Arjun Karki, securing political connections from the ministerial level to the Prime Minister’s residence. Another group, led by Manindra Malla and Rajesh Bajracharya, backed Hitendra Shakya, lobbying through business magnate Pawan Golyan and even reaching out to influential political figures like Arzu Rana Deuba.

According to sources, financial incentives (“nazarana”) were part of these lobbying efforts. Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli was reportedly aware of these maneuvers, with his residence (“Baluwatar”) and another political stronghold in Budhanilkantha becoming key decision-making hubs for the NEA’s leadership.

Operational Control and “Patan Durbar” Power Circle
Since Shakya’s appointment, insiders allege that all major operational and financial decisions within the NEA require approval from Malla’s group, informally referred to within the authority as “Patan Durbar.” No major contracts, Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), or staff transfers reportedly move forward without their consent. Some deputy managing directors claim they receive direct phone instructions from Malla himself.

The influence is said to be so strong that Shakya instructs project stakeholders to first secure Patan Durbar’s clearance before seeking his signature. This centralization of power outside official channels has alarmed several senior NEA officials and even the Minister of Energy, who has now reportedly curtailed some of the executive director’s powers and shifted them to the board.

From Profitability to Decline Risks
During Ghising’s tenure, the NEA had not only achieved profitability but also successfully eradicated load-shedding — a landmark achievement in Nepal’s recent economic history. Critics now warn that under the current model of politically influenced decision-making and middlemen dominance, the NEA could rapidly decline, potentially leading to financial instability and service disruption.

Consumers have already begun experiencing sporadic power outages, raising concerns that Nepal could regress toward load-shedding conditions. Officials within the NEA warn that if such practices are not curbed, the institution’s credibility will collapse, and the government itself could face reputational damage.

This development reflects a broader governance challenge in Nepal, where strategic state institutions risk becoming tools for political patronage and rent-seeking networks. The NEA — an organization critical to the country’s energy security and economic development — is now reportedly caught in a web of competing political interests. The allegations suggest that leadership changes were less about performance and more about securing control over lucrative contracts and institutional resources.

If unchecked, this pattern may not only reverse the operational gains made under Ghising but also undermine investor confidence in Nepal’s energy sector. Restoring professional, merit-based leadership and insulating the NEA from political interference will be crucial to preserving the authority’s stability and the country’s power supply reliability.