The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday reserved its order on the petition filed by Trinamool (TMC) legislator Subhandeep Chattopadhyay challenging West Bengal Assembly Speaker Rathendra Nath Bose’s June 3 decision to recognize the expulsion of TMC MLA Ritabrata Banerjee as Leader of Opposition (LoP).
During the hearing, Justice Krishna Rao repeatedly questioned the Speaker’s decision to recognize the expelled TMC member as a party partisan even though the party had formally recommended Chattopadhyay for the post.
Additional Solicitor General of the State Bilawadal Bhattacharya represents the speaker while TMC Lok Sabha member and senior advocate Kalyan Banerjee represents Chattopadhyay.
On May 4, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) won 207 seats against the TMC’s 80 seats.
On June 1, Ritabrata Banerjee and Sandiban Saha were expelled from the TMC after Prime Minister Suvendu Adhikari said their written complaint had led to a CID investigation into alleged signature forgery.
Read also:Who is Ritabrata Banerjee? The TMC MLA leads the ‘rebellious’ faction and is likely to be the Bengal LoP
The two legislators alleged that the signatures of several TMC MLAs on the May 19 resolution nominating Chattopadhyay as Leader of the Opposition in the Assembly were forged. The spokesman then requested a police investigation into the matter. Abhishek Banerjee, who sent the resolution to the Speaker, is considered a prime suspect by the police in the case.
On June 3, Bose recognized 58 rebel TMC legislators as the main opposition group in the 294-member House and appointed Ritabrata Banerjee as the opposition party.
On Wednesday, the bench questioned whether the allegation of signature forgery was enough for the speaker to ignore the TMC’s decision demanding Chattopadhyay as the signature line and recognize Banerjee as the signature line, even though the latter has been expelled by the TMC. “The court said the forgery has not been proven in court yet,” said one of the lawyers who attended the hearing, requesting anonymity.
The court also questioned Bhattacharya’s argument that the expulsion of Ritabrata Banerjee was an internal matter of the TMC and therefore had no impact on the council.
Kalyan Banerjee argued that a speaker cannot choose a LoP by ignoring the party he represents. “The legislators are part of a political party. How can the Speaker of Parliament ignore the party’s decision?” Kalyan Banerjee told the court.
Bhattacharya argued that on June 3, 56 out of 58 rebel MLAs decided to elect Ritabrata Banerjee as LoP member. However, the bench repeatedly questioned why the speaker ignored TMC’s May 19 letter stating that 78 MLAs had chosen Chattopadhyay as LoP.
Before reserving its order, the court also questioned whether the Speaker should have given the TMC an opportunity to present its case before announcing its decision.
