HC Bench Rejects Appeal of Dismissed TCS Officer Soumitra Chakma, Court Upholds Departmental Findings

By Our Correspondent

Agartala, February 18, 2026

The High Court bench has rejected the appeal filed by former Tripura Civil Service (TCS) Grade-I officer Soumitra Chakma, thereby upholding his dismissal from government service in connection with alleged irregularities related to land acquisition and compensation payment.

According to official records placed before the court, the dismissal was linked to allegations that land compensation meant for border fencing projects was processed in violation of established norms. It was alleged that land, which had reportedly not been legally acquired, was awarded compensation amounting to several crores of rupees. In addition, a payment of approximately Rs. 58,28,476 was allegedly made to a middleman through an unregistered deed, despite objections and red flags raised during administrative scrutiny.

The matter was examined through departmental enquiries, where findings reportedly supported claims of procedural violations and misuse of public funds. Authorities concluded that the actions breached service conduct rules and financial regulations, leading to disciplinary proceedings and eventual dismissal from service.

Soumitra Chakma challenged the dismissal order before the High Court, arguing procedural irregularities and seeking relief. However, the High Court bench dismissed the appeal on merit, effectively sustaining the departmental decision. Legal representatives appearing in the case cited references from previous judgments and service rules while defending the administrative action.

Officials involved in the case described the judgment as a significant development, noting that inquiries had confirmed irregular financial transactions and administrative lapses linked to land acquisition compensation.

The case has once again brought attention to growing concerns over administrative irregularities in various government departments. Observers and administrative circles note that many such irregularities are reportedly coming to light in recent times. However, despite repeated allegations, complaints, and audit observations, decisive action against several responsible officers is often delayed or not initiated at all.

Experts say that while disciplinary proceedings in some cases demonstrate accountability, there remains a broader perception that administrative action against erring officials is rare. The present case, therefore, is being viewed as an example where institutional action was taken following formal inquiry and legal scrutiny.

more news...