In the perception of most common voters in Kolkata — this scribe spoke to a number of them — it is the fault of the state Congress(I) that an understanding could not be reached. From students to service holders, businessmen or teachers, non left voters feel that Ms Mamata Banerjee had her reasons for insisting on retaining the overwhelming majority of seats for the Kolkata civic elections.

Her hands were forced by state Cong (I) leaders of Malda and Murshidadad, both Cong (I) strongholds. Here, Cong (I) stalwarts like Abu Hashem Choudhury, Mr. Adhir Choudhury and further up north Mrs Deepa Das Munshi, made it clear that they would not allow the TMC to contest too may seats. Their logic was irrefutable: what would be left of the Cong (I) in West Bengal, if it allowed itself to be dominated by the TMC even in its own stronghold?

And it did not help matters that Cong (I) leaders of Nadia, Howrah and Hooghly districts too, took their cue from this and started flexing their muscles. There was no understanding between the two parties.

The Cong (I) High command played a curious role. First, Mr, Pranab Mukherjee told state Congress leaders that they would have to agree by and large to what Ms Banerjee had to say. Later, after state Cong (I) leaders explained that out of the 25 seats offered by the TMC in the 141 seat Kolkata civic body, 13 were “dead cert losses”, and the going would not be very easy in the other seats too, Mr. Mukherjee's stance seemed to change. He did not stop state leaders from releasing their own list of 80-odd candidates, without reference to the TMC's offer at all.

State Cong (I) leaders claimed that while the high command was not involved, Mr. Mukherjee and central Cong (I) leaders were also concerned that the TMC was out to “finish” their party and leave it in no position to bargain strongly for seat adjustments for the crucial state assembly polls due in 2011.

However, other Cong (I) insiders had a different explanation: in addition to the analysis of prospects for the 25 seats, there were other reasons for the Cong (I)'s hard line vis-à-vis the TMC.

These developments were occurring after the second UPA Ministry had defeated cut-motions sponsored by the left parties and the BJP in parliament convincingly. The UPA managed to win direct support from the BSP party and indirect support from the RJD and the SP, much to the consternation of the left. The left parties are habituated to regarding these parties as their natural allies, increasingly so after leaders like Mr. Prakash Karat have been playing a major role in the decision making process within the CPI(M).

The UPA's attitude to the weakened Left has hardened in recent times. But at the same time, by allowing the Bengal Cong(I) to drive a hard bargain with the TMC , it was also sending a message to the unpredictable Mamata Banerjee as well.

Ms Banerjee's party voted against the cut motions, without creating any ripples. But senior Cong(I) leaders are known to be unhappy over her frequent and unexpected fluctuations in the matter of supporting official policies in parliament, whether over the matter of land acquisition or reservations for women. Worse, the lady has a distressing habit of supporting, or at least not opposing, decisions taken at cabinet meetings, but later opposing them publicly.

By manipulating critical support from the BSP, the JMM, the RJD or the SP — it is another matter whether the threat of pending corruption charges or CBI probes were used in the process of ensuring numbers — the UPA served notice to everyone that it was dependant on neither the left , nor the TMC. No one was indispensable. True, the means used may not be politically respectable, smacking of the most cynical kind of deal making, but in Indian politics of 2010 few people are going to shed tears over such tactics.

Now that Ms Banerjee is in Kolkata, there may be still an effort at bringing her party and the Cong(I) together, as the date for withdrawal is May 5. But if nothing changes, Ms Banerjee may find herself getting stumped politically by the state Cong(I), for the second time after the TMC's loss of the Siliguri civic body.

Which is a pity. For, logically, she was on strong ground vis-a-vis the Cong(I) on the Kolkata seat adjustments. She had not pushed for a hard bargain in the Cong(I) dominated districts. And also true was her claim that the Cong(I) was hardly involved in the agitations at Singur and Nandigram, which catapulted the non left opposition to the political centre-stage in the state. And it has been the TMC all the way since then, with the Cong(I) at best tagging along..

However, the Cong(I) would be well advised not to treat Ms Banerjee lightly. She remains the undisputed focus of the non-Left opposition in the state and the Cong(I) remains miles behind. By announcing her decision to go it alone if necessary, she may well end up decimating the Cong(I) in the civic polls. Recent indications, , such as Cong(I) supporters and workers crossing over to the TMC prior to the polls, do not augur very well for the ruling party at the centre. (IPA)