Calcutta High Court Questions Speaker’s Decision to Recognise Expelled TMC MLA as Leader of Opposition

June 11, 2026 : The Calcutta High Court on Thursday raised serious questions over the decision of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly Speaker to recognise expelled Trinamool Congress MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as the Leader of Opposition (LoP), despite the party officially nominating senior leader Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay for the post.

Hearing a petition challenging the Speaker’s decision, Justice Krishna Rao observed that an important issue requiring examination was whether the Speaker could recognise a Leader of Opposition without the approval or consent of the concerned political party. The Court was considering a plea filed against the recognition granted to Ritabrata Banerjee, who was expelled from the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) but was later acknowledged as LoP on the basis of support from a group of rebel legislators.

The dispute emerged after internal divisions within the Trinamool Congress following its defeat in the West Bengal Assembly elections. Banerjee and several legislators reportedly distanced themselves from the party leadership and claimed the backing of 57 AITC MLAs. Based on this claimed majority support within the legislative wing, Assembly Speaker Rathindranath Bose recognised Banerjee as the Leader of Opposition.

Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate and TMC leader Kalyan Banerjee argued that the Speaker’s action violated constitutional principles and established parliamentary conventions. He submitted that the party had formally communicated its decision to appoint Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay as the Leader of Opposition and that such a nomination was the exclusive prerogative of the political party.

According to the petitioner, the authority to choose the Leader of Opposition rests with the political party and not merely with a faction of legislators within the Assembly. It was argued that once the party leadership had officially conveyed its choice, the Speaker was obligated to recognise that nominee.

The petitioner further contended that recognising an expelled legislator as Leader of Opposition despite objections from the parent party undermined democratic norms and raised significant constitutional concerns regarding the functioning of legislative institutions and party discipline.

During the proceedings, the High Court noted that Ritabrata Banerjee appeared to lack the support of the political party following his expulsion. The Court’s observations focused on the limits of the Speaker’s powers and whether recognition of a Leader of Opposition could be granted independently of the party’s decision.

The petitioner also sought an interim stay on the Speaker’s order. However, the Court declined to grant any interim relief at this stage, allowing Banerjee to continue functioning as the Leader of Opposition until further orders.

The controversy has gained significance in the wake of the Assembly elections, where the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) formed the government and the TMC moved to the opposition benches. While the Mamata Banerjee-led party nominated Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay for the opposition leadership role, the Speaker chose to recognise Ritabrata Banerjee based on the support claimed by rebel MLAs.

The case is expected to have wider implications for the constitutional relationship between political parties and their legislative wings, the status of expelled legislators, and the scope of the Speaker’s authority in recognising the Leader of Opposition. The High Court has scheduled the matter for further hearing on June 16.