SUPREME COURT GIVES RIVAL TRINAMOOL FACTIONS 20 DAYS TO BUILD THEIR CASE AS BATTLE FOR PARTY NAME AND SYMBOL INTENSIFIES

October 26, 2026

The Supreme Court on Monday granted two rival factions of the All India Trinamool Congress (TMC) an additional 20 days to complete their submissions before the Election Commission of India, extending a high-stakes legal battle over the party’s name, organisational identity and iconic “flowers and grass” election symbol. The order gives both camps further opportunity to present documentary evidence and challenge their rivals’ claims before the poll panel makes its final determination.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana issued the directions after hearing submissions from senior lawyer and Trinamool MP Kalyan Banerjee, representing the Mamata Banerjee-led faction, and senior advocate K. Parmeswar, appearing for the rival faction led by Ritabrata Banerjee.

At the hearing, Kalyan Banerjee informed the court that the Ritabrata Banerjee-led group had not filed the required pleadings and supporting documents before the Election Commission. In response, Parmeswar explained that the faction had encountered difficulties obtaining non-judicial stamp papers needed for certain filings during the Dussehra festivities in West Bengal. He requested additional time to complete the formalities.

The Supreme Court subsequently granted the Ritabrata-led Democratic Trinamool Congress 10 days to submit its counter-affidavit and other necessary documents before the Election Commission. The Mamata Banerjee-led faction has been given a further 10 days to file its rejoinder and relevant documents after the rival camp submits its response.

The bench also clarified that either faction would retain the right to challenge the admissibility of documents produced by the other side. This means that the submission of evidence will not automatically establish the validity of either camp’s claim; the Election Commission must examine the material and decide the dispute in accordance with the applicable legal framework.

The latest order follows an earlier Supreme Court directive of September 28, when the bench instructed the Election Commission to decide the dispute within a specified timetable. The court had directed the rival factions to complete their pleadings and supporting submissions, after which the poll panel was to determine the matter within three months. The broader timetable envisages a decision within approximately four months of the earlier order.

The litigation stems from a petition filed by Mamata Banerjee challenging the Election Commission’s decision to freeze the Trinamool Congress’s original name and reserved election symbol pending a substantive determination of the competing claims. The dispute has placed the party’s legal identity at the centre of an increasingly consequential organisational and political confrontation.

On September 17, the Election Commission issued an interim order barring both factions from using the All India Trinamool Congress name and its reserved “flowers and grass” symbol while the dispute remained unresolved. The commission subsequently allotted the Mamata Banerjee-led group the name “Mamata All India Trinamool Congress” and the “Football Player” symbol. The Ritabrata Banerjee-led faction was allotted the name “Democratic Trinamool Congress” and the “Envelope” symbol.

These interim arrangements were intended to allow the rival groups to contest elections without prejudging which faction would ultimately be recognised as the legitimate continuation of the original party. The Election Commission has said that the competing claims require a substantive determination under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.

The dispute concerns more than a name or an electoral emblem. Recognition by the Election Commission can have significant consequences for a political organisation’s ability to contest elections under a familiar identity, mobilise voters and establish continuity with its previous electoral record. The eventual ruling could therefore affect both factions’ political standing and their claims to represent the original Trinamool Congress.

The rival camps have advanced competing arguments about the party’s organisational structure and the legitimacy of internal decisions. The Ritabrata-led group has challenged the existing leadership’s organisational arrangements, while the Mamata Banerjee-led faction has disputed the rebel camp’s interpretation of the party constitution and the validity of its organisational actions. The Election Commission will need to examine the relevant documents and evidence before reaching a conclusion.

The latest extension provides both sides with additional time to complete their cases, but it does not resolve the underlying dispute. Nor does it establish that either faction has a superior legal claim. The final decision rests with the Election Commission, subject to the applicable legal process and any further judicial scrutiny.

The case also reflects a wider challenge faced by India’s electoral institutions when rival groups claim the identity of an established political party. Such disputes require the authorities to balance organisational evidence, constitutional provisions, the legitimacy of internal party processes and the practical consequences for elections. The Supreme Court’s insistence on a defined timetable indicates that the dispute must proceed without indefinite delay while ensuring that both parties receive a fair opportunity to present their cases.

For West Bengal’s political landscape, the outcome could carry considerable significance. The party name and “flowers and grass” symbol have long been associated with the Trinamool Congress and its electoral identity. Their temporary unavailability to either faction has already forced both sides to operate under separate names and symbols, creating uncertainty for supporters and party workers.

The Supreme Court’s latest order therefore marks another procedural stage in a contest whose final outcome remains unsettled. With the filing deadlines now specified, attention will turn to the evidence submitted by the rival factions and the Election Commission’s assessment of their respective claims.

The central question is whether the poll panel can determine the dispute within the court-directed timetable while addressing the competing legal and organisational arguments in a transparent and legally defensible manner. Until that determination is made, neither faction can claim a final resolution of the battle over the Trinamool Congress’s name and electoral symbol.