The controversy gathered pace after senior Trinamool figures referred to separate gatherings of MLAs that were allegedly held without the knowledge of the party’s top leadership. The claims have fed speculation over whether a faction within the party is exploring a separate political line at a time when Trinamool is trying to regroup after losing office in West Bengal and facing sharper pressure from the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government.
Trinamool has expelled Sandipan Saha and Ritabrata Banerjee from its primary membership, citing conduct considered damaging to the organisation. Both leaders have rejected suggestions that they were involved in organising a parallel bloc or secret meetings. Their removal has nevertheless intensified questions over discipline inside a party that has long revolved around Mamata Banerjee’s authority and mass appeal.
Senior leaders Kunal Ghosh and Madan Mitra have publicly referred to internal unease, while party insiders have pointed to alleged meetings at a Kolkata hotel and at the residence of a legislator in North 24 Parganas. The party has not formally acknowledged any split, but the language used by its senior functionaries indicates concern over coordination among MLAs outside the recognised command structure.
The immediate flashpoint follows the postponement of a meeting of Trinamool legislators that Mamata Banerjee was expected to chair. A large number of MLAs reportedly stayed away, triggering speculation that the absenteeism reflected more than scheduling difficulties. The meeting was expected to review the party’s legislative strategy, its response to post-poll violence allegations and its approach to the new government in the Assembly.
Mamata Banerjee has responded by asserting that Trinamool is rooted in its workers rather than office-bearers or elected representatives. Her message to dissenters has been direct: the party would be better off without those acting against its interests. The statement was aimed at preventing the perception that the leadership is vulnerable to pressure from a group of MLAs, while also reassuring loyal workers that disciplinary action will continue where needed.
The crisis comes at a difficult point for Trinamool. After years as the dominant force in West Bengal, the party now has to operate as the principal opposition while defending its political legacy, welfare record and organisational network. Its internal cohesion is therefore central to its ability to challenge the BJP government both inside and outside the Assembly.
The BJP has sought to frame the controversy as evidence of a deeper collapse within Trinamool after years of centralised leadership. Its leaders argue that the party’s legislators are reacting to public anger over governance failures, corruption allegations and factional control at the local level. Trinamool has countered that the ruling party is using administrative pressure, investigations and political inducements to weaken the opposition.
A parallel dispute over alleged forged signatures has added another layer of tension. The West Bengal CID has recorded statements of several Trinamool MLAs in connection with a complaint related to the nomination process for the Leader of the Opposition. Trinamool leaders have described the probe as politically driven, while the state administration maintains that the matter is being examined through legal procedure.
The question of leadership is central to the turmoil. Mamata Banerjee remains Trinamool’s most recognisable face and the architect of its rise from a Congress breakaway in 1998 to the party that ended 34 years of Left Front rule in 2011. Yet the party’s transition from government to opposition has sharpened old tensions involving generational change, local power centres and the role of Abhishek Banerjee in the organisation.
The alleged attacks on Trinamool leaders after the election, including incidents involving Abhishek Banerjee’s outreach, have further complicated the party’s messaging. Opposition parties outside the BJP have condemned violence while also arguing that Trinamool is facing accumulated public anger from its time in power. That dual criticism has left Mamata Banerjee balancing two narratives: victimhood under a hostile administration and accountability for the party’s own organisational excesses.
