Despite the transfers, administrative officials are eager to return to the same local levels

A growing number of reports indicate that administrative officials in local authorities oppose transfers in order to maintain positions that facilitate the financial and operational “fixing” of illegal earnings.

Local officials say officials in some municipalities avoid transfers because of lucrative networks, commissions on construction projects and the ability to negotiate benefits.

Concerns have grown over relationships between these officials and suppliers that allegedly result in personal gain. Some officers, who have been working in the same municipality for a long time, create extensive networks of commissions and exploit the weaknesses of local management, which leads to frequent cases of corruption.

Anitakumari Yadav, deputy chief of Samsi Rural Municipality, emphasizes this point: “These officers rarely come to the office and when they do, it is only for a few hours. Complaints from local representatives are met with intimidation. Even after transfers, they often come back, increasing friction.”

Municipalities across Madhesh province are reportedly run by deputies because few officials are willing to move there. For example, administrative officer Subodh Thakur was recently transferred to Gaushala municipality after being transferred three times in five months. His return to previous positions such as Hansapur was blocked by representatives, citing his past involvement in alleged irregularities and conflicts over budget control.

Thakur’s refusal to transfer despite repeated orders from the Ministry of Federal Affairs highlights the ability of officials to manipulate bureaucratic systems for personal gain. In Hansapur and Kamala, officials protested against Thakur’s reappointment due to past disruptions and alleged budgetary misconduct.

Similarly, Administrative Officer Ganeshchandra Mishra, despite several transfers since his appointment to Samsi Rural Municipality in December 2021, has been steadily returning to his post. Local officials say he is using financial influence over the ministry and courts to avoid relocation. Even though his attendance was irregular, Mishra allegedly worked remotely from Janakpur, demanding that attendance records be sent to him.

Yadav reports further frustration with Mishra’s efforts to seek another reinstatement at Samsi despite the Ministry’s appointment of Manoj Kumar Saha in August 2024. Opposition to Mishra’s return highlights broader governance issues in local administrations, casting doubt on the effectiveness of transfer policies in entrenched corruption networks.