LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

Calcutta High Court questions recognition of expelled AITC MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as West Bengal LoP

11/06/2026BlogNo Comments

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday questioned the legality of the West Bengal Assembly Speaker’s decision to recognise expelled All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as the Leader of Opposition (LoP), despite the party having nominated senior leader Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay for the post.

The single-judge Bench of Justice Krishna Rao raised concerns regarding whether the Speaker could recognise a Leader of Opposition without the approval or consent of the political party concerned. The Court was hearing a petition challenging the Speaker’s decision to appoint Ritabrata Banerjee as LoP instead of Chattopadhyay, who had been officially nominated by the Mamata Banerjee-led faction of the AITC.

The dispute arises against the backdrop of an internal rebellion within the Trinamool Congress following the party’s defeat in the West Bengal Assembly elections. Ritabrata Banerjee, along with several legislators, reportedly broke ranks with the party leadership and claimed the support of 57 AITC MLAs. Based on this support within the legislative wing of the party, he was recognised as the Leader of Opposition by Assembly Speaker Rathindranath Bose.

Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate and AITC leader Kalyan Banerjee argued that the Speaker’s decision was contrary to constitutional principles and established parliamentary conventions. He submitted that AITC had formally communicated to the Speaker its decision to appoint Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay as the Leader of Opposition and that such a decision fell within the exclusive domain of the political party.

It was contended that the authority to nominate a Leader of Opposition vested in the political party and not merely in a faction of the legislative party. According to the petitioner, once the party had officially conveyed its choice, the Speaker was bound to recognise the nominee selected by the party leadership.

The Senior Counsel further argued that the recognition of an expelled legislator as Leader of Opposition, despite the party’s objections, undermined constitutional norms governing representative democracy and legislative functioning. It was submitted that the Speaker’s action warranted judicial scrutiny as it had significant implications for the relationship between political parties and their legislative wings.

During the hearing, the Court observed that Ritabrata Banerjee did not appear to have the support or consent of the political party after his expulsion from the TMC. The Court’s observations focused on the extent of the Speaker’s powers in recognising a Leader of Opposition and whether such recognition could be granted independently of the political party’s decision.

The petitioner also sought interim relief in the form of a stay on the Speaker’s decision recognising Ritabrata Banerjee as Leader of Opposition. However, the High Court declined to grant any interim order at this stage.

As a result, Ritabrata Banerjee will continue to function as the Leader of Opposition in the West Bengal Legislative Assembly until further orders.

The controversy stems from the political developments that followed the Assembly elections, in which the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) formed the government and the TMC moved into the opposition benches after being voted out of power. While the Mamata Banerjee-led TMC nominated Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay as its choice for the post of Leader of Opposition, the Speaker recognised Ritabrata Banerjee based on the support claimed by a group of rebel legislators.

The case raises important questions concerning the powers of the Speaker, the status of expelled legislators within a legislative party, the distinction between a political party and its legislative wing, and the constitutional framework governing recognition of the Leader of Opposition.

The High Court has fixed June 16 for the next hearing, when it is expected to further examine the legality of the Speaker’s decision and the competing claims regarding the post of Leader of Opposition.

The post Calcutta High Court questions recognition of expelled AITC MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as West Bengal LoP appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Calcutta High Court questions recognition of expelled AITC MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as West Bengal LoP
  • Delhi court denies bail to man accused of cheating Haryana judicial officer in Tinder honeytrap
  • Supreme Court stays Allahabad High Court verdict censuring senior UP bureaucrat over implementation of police reforms
  • Calcutta High Court stays coercive action against AITC MP Abhishek Banerjee in forge signature case
  • Supreme Court to hear Congress leader Meenakshi Natarajan plea challenging rejection of Rajya Sabha nomination on June 12

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.