The Trinamul Congress got a no-trust motion passed against the BJP-run board at the Bhatpara municipality on Thursday, but the ruling party’s hurrah was short-lived as Calcutta High Court set aside the entire proceedings within hours.

“The notification dated December 30 that the three councillors of the municipality had issued for a meeting to move a no-confidence motion against the existing chairman is hereby quashed. If any decision was taken in the meeting that was held following the said notification, they stand cancelled,” Justice Arindam Sinha in his verdict said.

A lawyer not connected with the case said the meeting at the civic body in the morning, in which Trinamul councillors voted 19-0 against Bhatpara municipality chairman Sourav Singh, stood null and void after the high court’s order.

Fourteen of the 33 councillors skipped the voting and were waiting for the result of their case in the high court over the validity of the notification for the no-confidence motion.

Later in the evening, Trinamul Congress leader and minister Jyotipriya Mullick said the party would challenge the verdict before a division bench of the high court on Friday.

“We were confident enough to regain power since most of the councillors, who had left us had returned realising their mistakes. Today’s result proved that people are no longer with the BJP,” said Mullick, who is also Trinamul’s North 24-Parganas district president.

The municipality has total 35 wards, but two are vacant at present.

The equations in the civic body changed after 26 Trinamul Councillors joined the BJP following the Lok Sabha polls. BJP MP Arjun Singh, who was earlier the chairman of the Trinamul-run board, resigned and his nephew Sourav Singh, who also defected from Trinamul to the BJP, became the chairman in June last year.

But over the past few months, most the defectors started returning to Trinamul, following which the ruling party moved a no-confidence motion against the chairman.

BJP MP Arjun Sing said: “Trinamul became desperate to grab power. If they have enough support, why did they take unlawful steps? We knew their meeting would be declared illegal. So, we abstained from the voting on the no-trust motion. The court has also said the same thing.”