Calcutta HC questions expelled TMC MLA Ritabrata Banerjee’s appointment as LoP by Speaker

Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription

The View From India Looking at World Affairs from the Indian perspective.

First Day First Show News and reviews from the world of cinema and streaming.

Today's Cache Your download of the top 5 technology stories of the day.

Data Point Decoding the headlines with facts, figures, and numbers

Health Matters Ramya Kannan writes to you on getting to good health, and staying there

The Hindu On Books Books of the week, reviews, excerpts, new titles and features.

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday (June 11, 2026) questioned the Speaker’s decision to recognise the expelled Trinamool Congress MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) of the West Bengal Assembly without the consent of the political party.

While hearing a petition filed by the Trinamool Congress against Speaker Rathindra Bose’s move to accept a group of 59 rebel MLAs’ proposal to recognise Mr. Ritabrata Banerjee as the LoP instead of Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay, the Single Bench of the court, presided over by Justice Krishna Rao, asked the State, “The person, who was appointed as the LoP, doesn’t belong to any political party. He was expelled. Can the Speaker recognise a rebel leader as the LoP without the consent of a political party?”

In response, the State, represented by Additional Advocate General (AAG) Bilwadal Bhattacharya, sought time to file an affidavit with all relevant records, including the order under challenge. The court scheduled the next hearing on June 16.

Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate and TMC MP Kalyan Bandyopadhyay argued that the Speaker’s decision “hit the Constitution’s basic structure” by violating its tenth schedule that settled law governing the relationship between a political party and its legislature party.

Seeking an interim stay on the Speaker’s decision, Mr. Bandyopadhyay told the court, “Who will be appointed as the LoP? There is a legal structure that is usually followed. The order will be carried from the consent of the political party to which he belongs to, not the legislature party. This rebel group is not willing to be merged to any other political party while two of their MLAs have been expelled. Independent MLAs are not in any political party. In such a situation, there should be no LoP.”

He argued that this matter was not about whether “the signatures were right or wrong. It was only about the consent of a political party. After the party expelled him, it was not even challenged. How could the Spe