##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WA No.12 of 2026

1. The State of Tripura represented by the Commissioner & Secretary, General Administration (Personnel & Training) Department, Government of Tripura, having his office at Secretariat Building, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, Sub-Division: Agartala, West Tripura, PIN-799006

2. The Commissioner & Secretary, General Administration, Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Tripura, having his office at Secretariat Building, P.O. Kunjaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, Sub-Division: Agartala, District- West Tripura, PIN-799006

3. The District Magistrate & Collector, Unakoti, having his office at Kailashahar, P.O. and P.S. Kailashahar, District- Unakoti Tripura

4. The District Magistrate & Collector, North Tripura District, having his office at Dharmanagar, P.O. and P.S. Dharmanagar, District- Udaipur .........Appellant(s);

Versus Sri Goutam Choudhury, Son of Late Makhan Lal Choudhury, Resident of village- Ashram Chowmuhani, P.O. Dhaleswar, P.S. East Agartala, Agartala, West Tripura, PIN-799007 .........Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dipankar Sarma, Addl. G.A.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Somik Deb, Sr. Advocate, Ms. S. Tripura, Advocate, Mr. Jishan Samed, Advocate.

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA Date of hearing and Judgment: 29.09.2026 Whether Fit for Reporting: NO JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

(M.S. Ramachandra Rao, CJ)

Heard Mr. Dipankar Sarma, learned Additional Government

Advocate for the appellants and Mr. Somik Deb, learned Senior Counsel, for

the respondent.

2. This Writ Appeal is filed by the appellants challenging the judgment dt.26.09.2025 in WP(C) No.372/2024 passed by the learned Single Judge.

Background Facts:

3. A show cause notice that was issued to the respondent herein on 15.09.2018 by the then District Magistrate & Collector, Sepahijala District to which the petitioner submitted a reply on 17.10.2020.

4. Thereafter Disciplinary Enquiry was commenced by appointing a Presenting Officer under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 [“The Rules”, for short]

5. Articles of charge were framed and communicated to the respondent to which the respondent submitted his defense.

6. Thereafter the Inquiry Authority submitted a report on

10.05.2021 [Annexure-9] exonerating the respondent of all charges.

7. But on 28.07.2021 the Principal Secretary, General Administration (AR) Department, Government of Tripura (Disciplinary authority) issued an order directing for fresh inquiry against the respondent by appointing another Inquiry Officer to enquire into the charge framed against the respondent.

8. Later on 17.01.2022 the same Principal Secretary issued a further order appointing the Commissioner of Departmental Inquiries as Inquiry Authority to enquire into the charges framed against the respondent. He again changed the Inquiry officer by another order dt.16.3.2023.

9. The order dt.28.07.2021 and the subsequent orders dt.17.01.2022 and dt.16.03.2023 were questioned in WP(C) No.708/2023 by the respondent before this Court.

Order dt.11.12.2023 passed by learned Single Judge in WP(C)

No.708/2023:

10. By an order dt.11.12.2023, the learned single Judge allowed the Writ Petition.

11. He noted that the order dt.28.07.2021 issued by the Principal Secretary, General Administration (AR) Department, Government of Tripura appointing another officer to enquire into the charges framed against the petitioner therein cannot be sustained, and that if the Disciplinary Authority disagrees with the findings of the Inquiry Officer, it is mandatory for the Disciplinary Authority to follow Rule 15(2) of the Rules which state as under:

“15. Action on the inquiry report (1) ...

(2) The Disciplinary Authority shall forward or cause to be forwarded a copy of the report of the inquiry, if any, held by the Disciplinary Authority or where the Disciplinary Authority is not the Inquiring Author