The Calcutta High Court questioned the procedure followed in recognising the Leader of Opposition in West Bengal Assembly, asking whether the Speaker can ignore the largest opposition party’s proposal and recognise another claimant amid rival LoP claims.
The Calcutta High Court questioned the process adopted for recognising the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) in the West Bengal Legislative Assembly, observing that the recommendation made by the majority opposition party for the post was not considered.
The court also raised a query on whether the Speaker has the authority to disregard the proposal of the largest opposition party and appoint another person as the LoP.
Justice Krishna Rao was hearing a petition filed by Sobandeb Chattopadhyay, challenging Speaker Rathindranath Bose’s decision to recognise rebel MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as the Leader of the Opposition in the state Assembly.
During the proceedings, Justice Rao asked how the Speaker should act when two separate claims for the LoP post are submitted by members of the same political party.
The court observed that although the Speaker is expected to consider a resolution submitted by the largest opposition party, any dispute involving rival claims must be examined as per legal provisions.
Justice Rao further sought clarification on whether the Speaker could make such a decision independently or whether it was necessary to hear all concerned parties before recognising a person as the LoP.
Representing the Speaker, advocate Billwadal Bhattacharya argued that under the Bengal Legislative Assembly Emoluments Act, 1937, the Leader of the Opposition is the member recognised as the leader of the party having the highest numerical strength in the Assembly.
He further submitted during the hearing that the Speaker’s decision is “final and conclusive” in matters concerning disputes over a party’s strength or leadership.
The court was also informed that two rebel MLAs, Ritabrata Banerjee and Sandipan Saha, had alleged that the signatures on the resolution supporting Chattopadhyay’s appointment were not theirs.
Following the complaint, the Speaker’s office referred the issue to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) of the West Bengal Police for an inquiry.
The hearing is scheduled to continue on Wednesday. The controversy surrounding the Speaker’s decision to recognise Ritabrata as the LoP intensified after the High Court made significant observations regarding the legality of the appointment.
Earlier, the High Court had questioned whether the Speaker could recognise a Leader of the Opposition without obtaining the consent of the concerned political party.
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.
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.
READ ALSO: TMC Leaders in Trouble: Court Orders Bail Bond in ECI Protest Case
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.
Justice Rao had earlier noted that the person recognised as LoP was allegedly no longer a member of the party after his expulsion and questioned the legal validity of such recognition.