The Calcutta High Court is examining the legality of recognising rebel TMC MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as Leader of Opposition in the West Bengal Assembly. Hearing Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay’s challenge, the Court directed that the Speaker’s recognition order be placed on record and scheduled further hearing for June 16.
The Calcutta High Court is set to decide an important constitutional and legislative question concerning the appointment of the Leader of Opposition (LoP) in the 18th West Bengal Legislative Assembly. The dispute centers on whether the Speaker of the Assembly can recognise a legislator as the LoP despite the opposition political party officially nominating a different individual for the position.
The controversy has arisen from the Speaker’s decision to recognise rebel Trinamool Congress (TMC) MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as the Leader of Opposition. The decision has been challenged before the High Court by TMC MLA Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay, who claims that he was the party’s officially nominated candidate for the post.
The matter was taken up on Thursday before Justice Krishna Rao. During the hearing, counsel appearing for the respondents sought additional time to file their response to Chattopadhyay’s application seeking interim relief. Taking note of the request, the Court posted the matter for further consideration on June 16.
Submissions of Parties:
Appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Senior Advocate Kalyan Banerjee argued that the Speaker could not have disregarded the recommendation made by the Trinamool Congress in favour of Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay. He contended that both parliamentary convention and established practice in the West Bengal Legislative Assembly require the Speaker to recognise the individual formally nominated by the opposition party.
Highlighting the distinction between the political party and its legislative wing, Banerjee submitted,
“The decision must come from the political party and not the legislature party.”
According to the petitioner, following the declaration of the 2026 West Bengal Assembly election results on May 4, the Trinamool Congress convened a meeting of its MLAs on May 6. During that meeting, Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay was selected as the party’s nominee for the position of Leader of Opposition. The decision was subsequently communicated to the office of the Speaker.
The petition states that the Speaker later sought a formal resolution adopted by the legislature party along with signatures of supporting MLAs. In response, another meeting of party legislators was held on May 19, after which the resolution and attendance records were submitted to the Speaker’s office.
Despite these communications, the petitioner alleges that the Speaker eventually recognised Ritabrata Banerjee as the Leader of Opposition based on support claimed by a group of MLAs who had broken ranks with the party leadership.
Banerjee further argued before the Court that Ritabrata Banerjee and another legislator had already been expelled from the Trinamool Congress prior to his recognition as the Leader of Opposition. Therefore, according to the petitioner, his appointment was contrary to established legislative conventions and party authority.
Opposing the petition, Additional Advocate General Bilwadal Bhattacharya, appearing for the Speaker, questioned the maintainability of the proceedings. He argued that judicial scrutiny of the Speaker’s decision was barred under Article 212 of the Constitution, which restricts courts from examining legislative proceedings on the ground of procedural irregularities.
Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy appeared on behalf of Trinamool Congress chairperson Mamata Banerjee.
Directions of the Court:
During the hearing, the Court observed that the order through which Ritabrata Banerjee had been recognised as Leader of Opposition would need to be placed on record to enable an effective adjudication of the issues raised in the petition.
The dispute is scheduled to be heard again on June 16, just two days before the first session of the newly constituted West Bengal Legislative Assembly is set to commence on June 18.
Background of the Case
The political confrontation escalated when 58 of the TMC’s 80 MLAs reportedly extended support to Ritabrata Banerjee and formally staked claim to be recognised as the principal opposition bloc in the West Bengal Legislative Assembly. The development marked one of the most serious internal challenges faced by the party since its formation nearly three decades ago.
READ ALSO: TMC Leaders in Trouble: Court Orders Bail Bond in ECI Protest Case
The rebel faction argued that it represented the majority of the party’s legislative strength and was therefore entitled to recognition within the Assembly. The claim was placed before Speaker Rathindra Bose, who subsequently examined the matter and delivered a ruling that significantly altered the political landscape of the State Assembly.
After considering the claims and counterclaims, the Speaker accepted the contention of the rebel camp and recognised Ritabrata Banerjee as the Leader of the Opposition.
In arriving at his decision, the Speaker reportedly concluded that the expulsions of Ritabrata Banerjee and fellow rebel legislator Sandipan Saha were not valid under the provisions of the party’s constitution. On that basis, he held that the two legislators continued to remain members of the party and that the faction led by Ritabrata Banerjee had the requisite numerical strength to claim recognition.
The ruling effectively shifted the balance of power within the Assembly and dealt a significant blow to the official TMC leadership.
The Trinamool Congress has strongly objected to the Speaker’s decision and has now sought judicial intervention. The party contends that Ritabrata Banerjee was expelled from the organisation and therefore could not legally be recognised as the Leader of the Opposition. According to the TMC, the Speaker’s interpretation of the party constitution is flawed and inconsistent with the party’s internal disciplinary framework.
Through its petition, the party is expected to argue that a person who has ceased to be a member of the party cannot claim leadership of the opposition benches merely on the basis of support from certain legislators. The challenge is also likely to focus on the legality of the Speaker’s determination regarding the validity of the expulsions.
The High Court’s decision could have significant consequences for the functioning of the Assembly and the future of the ongoing political dispute.
While the legal battle unfolds, Ritabrata Banerjee has remained cautious about commenting on possible future political developments.
Banerjee said:
“I have not spoken to any parliamentarians in the last seven days. So I can’t say what parliamentarians would do. But I live in the now. Nobody can say what will happen tomorrow. Have patience. A lot can happen.”
The statement has fuelled speculation about possible shifts in political alignments within the party and beyond.
Earlier, Banerjee had asserted that more than two-thirds of the TMC’s elected legislators had backed his faction. He maintained that the Speaker had rightly recognised his group as the “principal opposition” in the 18th West Bengal Legislative Assembly on the basis of its numerical strength.
The present dispute is widely viewed as a manifestation of deeper fault lines within the Trinamool Congress. Founded by Mamata Banerjee nearly 28 years ago, the party has rarely witnessed a rebellion of this magnitude.
Political observers have linked the revolt to growing tensions over the influence exercised by Abhishek Banerjee within the organisation. Several members of the rebel camp have projected their movement as a challenge to what they describe as increasing centralisation of authority within the party structure.
At the same time, the dissident group has continued to express respect for Mamata Banerjee’s leadership and has frequently referred to her as a guiding figure. This dual approach has revealed differences even within the rebel faction regarding the future direction of the movement.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE