A lawyer representing Mamata Banerjee in Calcutta High Court over her election petition has written to acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal, seeking reassignment of the hearing from Justice Kaushik Chanda.

The chief minister has challenged the results of the Nandigram Assembly election in which she lost to BJP candidate, Suvendu Adhikari.

Advocate Sanjay Basu, representing Mamata, mentioned in his letter that Justice Chanda was an “active member of the BJP”.

“… in view of the fact that the respondent (Adhikari) in the election petition is a member of the BJP and the honourable judge was an active member of the BJP, it will lead to a situation and perception whereby the honourable judge, in adjudicating the matter, may be said to be “judge in his own cause”. Justice must not only be done; it must also be seen to be done,” wrote Basu, seeking reassignment of the petition.

Chief Justice Bindal is yet to take a decision on Basu’s letter.

In his letter, Basu said the election petition had been filed on May 21 and mentioned before Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya on June 9 as he had been “assigned jurisdiction in respect of all civil matters”.

The letter said the matter, which was to appear for presentation on June 10, didn’t appear before Justice Bhattacharya as he didn’t have jurisdiction and was later assigned to Justice Chanda following repeated applications for assignment of the election petition before an appropriate judge.

The letter suggested that Justice Chanda, who was made an additional judge of the high court in 2019, was yet to be confirmed as a permanent judge. According to high court judge appointment norms, additional judges are confirmed as permanent judges by the Supreme Court collegium.

The ruling Trinamul Congress tweeted that “Justice Kaushik Chanda is seen sharing a stage with BJP’s @DilipGhoshBJP” . Two photographs also surfaced on Twitter handles of Trinamul and some supporters.

Later in the day, BJP state unit chief Dilip Ghosh confirmed having attended events of his party’s legal cell alongside Justice Chanda when the judge was a lawyer.

Ghosh said: “He had a political identity while he was a lawyer, as many lawyers are known to have. He proved his abilities, and on the basis of merit, impartiality and hard work over the years, he was elevated to the position of a judge. His past political affiliation should not be held against him now.”

The Trinamul legal cell staged a demonstration outside the court premises, seeking the shifting of the hearing of Mamata’s petition to any other judge of the court.

“He appeared in some cases for the BJP as a lawyer, between 2012 and 2018… as recently as 2018,” said a senior advocate, adding that judges have been known to recused themselves from cases as soon as such issues are raised.

But Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, senior advocate and a Rajya Sabha member of the CPM, said: “The pictures posted on social media were taken at a time when he was a lawyer of the court. Each and every lawyer has a political identity. So what? This should not be done. After all, he is now a judge.”