The Calcutta High Court has refused to grant interim relief to Trinamool Congress MLA Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay in his challenge against the appointment of another party legislator as the Leader of Opposition in the 18th West Bengal Legislative Assembly. Justice Krishna Rao held that no prima facie case was made out at this stage to justify an interim order restraining the functioning of the newly recognized Leader of Opposition.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose after the 2026 West Bengal Assembly elections, where the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) emerged as the second-largest party in the Assembly with 80 seats. According to the petitioner, a meeting of AITC legislators held on 6 May 2026 unanimously nominated him as Leader of Opposition, and the party leadership subsequently communicated this decision to the Speaker.
The petitioner claimed that the Speaker had initially recognized him in that role during Assembly proceedings. However, controversy later emerged when allegations were raised regarding signatures appearing on the resolution said to have authorized his appointment. A police complaint was lodged, and a criminal investigation was initiated concerning the authenticity of those signatures.
Meanwhile, a group of legislators led by Respondent No. 5 approached the Speaker claiming support from a majority of AITC MLAs and sought recognition of their chosen leader as the Leader of Opposition. The Speaker subsequently recognized Respondent No. 5 as Leader of Opposition and Respondent No. 6 as Chief Whip.
Arguments Before the Court
Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandopadhyay, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the Speaker should have acted on the decision communicated by the political party and not on a representation submitted by a group of legislators. He relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Subhash Desai v. Principal Secretary, Governor of Maharashtra, contending that constitutional provisions recognize the primacy of the political party over a legislature party in matters of internal leadership and authority.
On the other hand, the State and the private respondents contended that the Speaker had acted after considering the support of a majority of legislators. They argued that 58 out of 80 AITC MLAs had jointly supported Respondent No. 5 and that 56 of them personally appeared before the Speaker. According to them, the Speaker's decision was based on numerical strength and followed an inquiry into the competing claims.
Court’s Observations
Justice Rao noted that the original resolution relied upon by the petitioner had become disputed after objections were raised regarding signatures appearing on it. The Court also took note of the fact that a police investigation concerning those allegations was already pending.
The Court further observed that 58 elected legislators of the AITC had submitted a joint request supporting Respondent No. 5 and that the Speaker had considered their claim while making the appointment.
Referring to the Bengal Legislative Assembly (Members’ Emoluments) Act, 1937, the Court noted that the Leader of Opposition is the leader of the opposition party having the greatest numerical strength in the Assembly. The statute also provides that in case of doubt, the Speaker's decision on the issue is final and conclusive.
The Court also recorded that the expulsion of Respondent No. 5 from the party was itself under challenge and that a civil court had passed an interim order staying the operation of the expulsion notice until 30 June 2026.
As the bench observed, the Speaker had conducted an inquiry, considered the competing claims, and taken a decision after examining the materials placed before him.
Decision
Declining the prayer for interim protection, Justice Krishna Rao held that the petitioner had failed to establish a prima facie case or demonstrate that the balance of convenience favored the grant of an interim order.
The Court therefore refused to restrain Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 from functioning as Leader of Opposition and Chief Whip respectively during the pendency of the writ proceedings.
The respondents have been directed to file their affidavits, and the matter has been listed for further hearing on 28 July 2026.
Case Details
Case Title: Sobhandeb Chattopadhyay v. Hon’ble Speaker, West Bengal Legislative Assembly & Ors.
Case Number: W.P.O. No. 276 of 2026
Judge: Justice Krishna Rao
Decision Date: 18 June 2026
