In a move that has sparked widespread attention, the Tripura government has dismissed Pravin Lal Aggarwal, the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, on charges of misleading state authorities over the naming of wildlife in the Sepahijala Wildlife Sanctuary and Zoo.

 The controversy stems from the decision to name a lioness ‘Sita’ and another animal ‘Akbar,’ which led to a legal battle and public outcry.

The Sepahijala Wildlife Sanctuary and Zoo, renowned for its diverse collection of fauna, recently welcomed new additions, including a pair of Royal Bengal tigers, leopards, golden and silver pheasants, peacocks, and mountain mynas.

 These animals were transferred following guidelines set by the Central Zoo Authority (CZA), with the aim of enriching the genetic pool and enhancing the experience for visitors.

 However, the exchange program between the Sepahijala Zoo and the North Bengal Zoo in Siliguri, which included a lion couple named ‘Sita’ and ‘Akbar,’ spectacled monkeys, leopard cats, and black bucks, took an unexpected turn.

 The naming of the lion couple led the Bengali wing of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) to file a legal challenge, arguing that animals should not be named after revered personalities or deities.

 The Calcutta High Court’s circuit bench in Jalpaiguri ruled in favour of this argument, causing a ripple effect through the state’s administrative and wildlife management departments.

 The court’s directive to change the names put the Bengal Forest Department in a tight spot, as it argued that the responsibility for renaming fell to the Tripura Zoo authority.

 Upon investigation, it was discovered that Aggarwal had played a key role in the naming process and had allegedly misled the Tripura government about the matter.

 A senior government official, preferring to remain anonymous, disclosed that Aggarwal’s dismissal on February 23 came after it was found he had kept the government in the dark about his actions.

 The official mentioned that disciplinary action against Aggarwal is under consideration, highlighting the seriousness with which the state is treating the incident.

 The Tripura government’s decision has ignited a debate on the ethics of naming animals in captivity and the cultural sensitivities surrounding such decisions.

 The controversy underscores the complex interplay between wildlife conservation, cultural values, and administrative accountability.

As the situation unfolds, it remains to be seen how the zoo authorities will navigate these challenging waters and what changes will be implemented to prevent similar issues in the future.