Mamata Banerjee Demand: The political landscape of West Bengal has entered a dramatic new phase as Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has written a second letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, reiterating her demand for the withdrawal of the Centre-appointed interlocutor for issues related to the Darjeeling hills, Terai, and Dooars regions. Calling the move “unconstitutional, arbitrary and a direct violation of federal principles”, Banerjee’s renewed appeal has intensified the national conversation around federalism, state autonomy, and Centre-State relations in India.

Her sharp objections follow a memo issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) stating that the interlocutor’s office—headed by senior retired IPS officer and former Deputy NSA Pankaj Kumar Singh—had already been formally activated. This announcement has served as the trigger for one of the strongest political responses from Kolkata in recent years.

This in-depth article explores the politics, constitutional implications, stakeholder reactions, and wider federal significance of the issue, making it a complete long-form report for readers, journalists, researchers, and policy observers.

1. The Core Issue: Why Mamata Banerjee is Opposing the Interlocutor Appointment

Mamata Banerjee’s letter argues that:

🔹 The interlocutor’s appointment violates the federal structure

She states that the Centre bypassed the elected state government in a matter that, by law, falls under the jurisdiction of the Gorkha Territorial Administration (GTA) and the State of West Bengal.

🔹 The appointment undermines the GTA Act, 2011

According to the GTA Act:

• “Government” for the GTA region means the Government of West Bengal, not the Union Government.

🔹 The Centre acted unilaterally

Banerjee states that the Union Government neither consulted nor informed the state before creating the interlocutor’s office.

🔹 The action may destabilize peace in the hills

She fears the move might revive old tensions in Darjeeling hills, where identity issues, administrative demands, and territorial aspirations have historically been sensitive.

🔹 The decision appears politically motivated

She claims the timing suggests an attempt to interfere in West Bengal’s internal political environment ahead of upcoming electoral cycles.

2. Legal & Constitutional Dimensions of the Conflict

2.1 Cooperative Federalism Under Strain

India’s Constitution is built on a delicate balance of power between the Centre and the States. Mamata argues that the Centre’s appointment violates this principle.

📘 Reference – About Federal Structure in India
https://legislative.gov.in/constitution-of-india
https://mha.gov.in

2.2 GTA Act, 2011

The GTA is a semi-autonomous administrative body formed through a tripartite agreement among:

• Government of India
• Government of West Bengal
• Gorkha Janmukti Morcha

📘 GTA Agreement (2011) Summary – PIB Archive:
https://pib.gov.in

According to this agreement, the administrative authority lies with the state government, not with the Centre, unless mutually agreed upon.

2.3 Jurisdictional Overreach

The Chief Minister argues that:

• There is no constitutional provision empowering the Centre to create parallel administrative mechanisms for the GTA without state consent.

2.4 Risk of Setting a Wrong Precedent

If the Centre’s action stands, it might allow federal interference in other autonomous bodies across India—such as:

• Sixth Schedule Areas
• Tribal councils
• Hill development authorities

3. Political Implications: What’s at Stake for Bengal and the Nation

3.1 Hills Politics at a Crossroads

Darjeeling has long been politically complex due to:

• Gorkhaland movement
• Power shifts between GJM factions
• Identity and administrative autonomy demands

Any unilateral move by the Centre has immediate political consequences.

3.2 Electoral Context

The Centre’s interlocutor appointment and Mamata’s opposition could strongly influence:

• Upcoming panchayat polls
• 2026 West Bengal Assembly Elections
• Local political alignments in Darjeeling, Kalimpong, Kurseong, and the Dooars belt

3.3 The “State Dignity” Narrative

Mamata Banerjee is positioning herself as:

• A defender of state autonomy
• A protector of constitutional federal principles
• A leader resisting federal overreach

This narrative has deep roots in Bengal’s political identity.

4. A Look Back: What Happened Before This Second Letter

4.1 First Letter (October 2025)

In her earlier letter, Mamata expressed:

• Shock at the appointment
• Concern about bypassing state consultation
• Fear of destabilizing the hills

4.2 Centre’s Memo That Triggered the Second Letter

On 10 November 2025, the Ministry of Home Affairs announced that:

• The interlocutor’s office had been operationalized
• Meetings with key stakeholders would begin immediately

This prompted Banerjee’s second letter.

📘 Ministry of Home Affairs – Notifications:
https://www.mha.gov.in/notices

5. Stakeholder Reactions: Hills, State, Centre & Experts Speak

5.1 West Bengal Government

The ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) is firmly behind Mamata’s stand. Senior ministers describe the Centre’s step as:

• “Undemocratic”
• “A direct attack on state rights”
• “An attempt to bypass elected systems”

5.2 Central Government

The Centre maintains:

• The interlocutor is meant to resolve long-standing demands of Gorkha communities.
• The move is constructive, not political.

5.3 Gorkha Parties & Hill Groups

The reactions are mixed:

Supporters of the interlocutor say:

• It brings national-level attention to the hills.
• It may help reopen dialogues on identity issues.

Opponents say:

• It threatens the delicate peace.
• The Centre is sidestepping the GTA and state government.

5.4 Constitutional & Governance Experts

Experts are divided:

Some support Mamata’s stance, calling the Centre’s move:

• “A breach of federal propriety”
• “Legally questionable”

Others support the interlocutor, arguing:

• Hill issues need a neutral nation-level mediator
• Centre has moral responsibility to address region-specific grievances

6. Administrative, Social, and Security Implications

6.1 Impact on GTA Governance

If two administrative structures operate simultaneously:

• Policy conflicts may arise
• Development work may slow down
• Decision-making may become fragmented

6.2 Potential for Political Unrest

Darjeeling has a history of:

• Protests
• Bandhs
• Agitations related to identity and autonomy

A mismatch between Centre and State actions could revive tensions.

6.3 Impact on Development Projects

Several ongoing projects may face delays, including:

• Road development
• Water supply systems
• Infrastructure upgrades
• Hill tourism enhancement programmes

📘 Government of Bengal – Hill Development Department:
https://wb.gov.in

📘 Ministry of DoNER (for NE & hill development references):
https://mdoner.gov.in

7. Could This Lead to a Legal Battle?

Legal experts indicate that if the Centre does not withdraw its decision, West Bengal may:

• Approach the Supreme Court
• File a federal dispute under Article 131 of the Constitution

📘 Supreme Court of India – Jurisdiction Information:
https://main.sci.gov.in

Article 131 allows a state to sue the Union Government over constitutional matters involving:

• Rights
• Powers
• Disputes of law

This could become a landmark Centre-State case.

8. Federalism in India: The Broader Message

The confrontation between Mamata Banerjee and the Centre raises vital questions:

8.1 How much authority does a state have over its autonomous administrative bodies?

8.2 Can the Centre intervene without consulting the state in region-specific matters?

8.3 Should politically sensitive areas be handled by local or national representatives?

8.4 Could this reshape Centre-State relations across India?

Many analysts believe it might.

9. What Happens Next? Possible Scenarios

Scenario A: The Centre Withdraws the Interlocutor

This would be a major political victory for Mamata Banerjee and is likely to strengthen federalism movements across other states.

Scenario B: The Centre Holds Firm

This could lead to:

• Legal confrontation
• Increased political polarization in Bengal
• Administrative confusion in the hills

Scenario C: Negotiated Middle Path

The Centre may:

• Keep the interlocutor
• But include West Bengal officials in decision-making
• Or work under GTA guidelines

10. Conclusion: A Nationally Significant Federal Flashpoint

Mamata Banerjee’s second letter to PM Modi is more than a routine administrative objection. It symbolizes a major constitutional debate, a political confrontation, and a struggle for administrative control in one of India’s most sensitive regional landscapes.

Her insistence on withdrawing the interlocutor highlights:

• A demand for state dignity
• A defence of constitutional federalism
• A challenge to central unilateralism

The Centre’s next move will define:

• Hill politics
• Future of GTA
• India’s federal balance
• Bengal’s political roadmap for 2026

This is not just a conflict—it is a test of India’s federal spirit in 2025.

🔗 Relevant External Links (Government & Reputed Sources Only)

Government & Legal Resources

• Constitution of India: https://legislative.gov.in/constitution-of-india
• Ministry of Home Affairs: https://www.mha.gov.in
• Supreme Court of India: https://main.sci.gov.in
• Government of West Bengal: https://wb.gov.in
• PIB – Government Notifications: https://pib.gov.in

Also read: Home | Channel 6 Network – Latest News, Breaking Updates: Politics, Business, Tech & More