The Indian government’s recent proposal to bring Chandigarh under the purview of Article 240 of the Constitution has triggered a major political backlash in Punjab. Political leaders across the spectrum are expressing grave concerns about the potential shift in Chandigarh’s administrative control and its implications for Punjab’s claim to its capital city.
A parliamentary bulletin revealed plans to introduce the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill 2025 during the Winter Session, beginning December 1. This legislative measure would enable the President to directly issue regulations for Chandigarh, effectively severing its current administrative ties with Punjab. This differs significantly from the current arrangement where the Governor of Punjab also serves as Chandigarh’s administrator.
Article 240 of the Constitution grants the President the authority to make regulations for the peace, progress, and good governance of specific Union Territories, which do not currently include Chandigarh. The city was established as a Union Territory after the division of Punjab in 1966 and has since served as the shared capital for both Punjab and Haryana.
Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann vehemently criticized the move, accusing the central government of plotting to seize Punjab’s capital. He reaffirmed Punjab’s inherent right to Chandigarh, stating, “Chandigarh was, is and will always remain an integral part of Punjab.” Mann promised decisive action to safeguard the state’s interests.
Arvind Kejriwal, chief of the Aam Aadmi Party, decried the move as an assault on Punjab’s identity and rights. He emphasized Chandigarh’s belonging to Punjab and highlighted the state’s historical sacrifices.
Punjab Congress president Amarinder Singh Raja Warring called the proposal “uncalled for” and warned of severe consequences, asserting that any attempt to change Chandigarh’s status would be met with strong opposition. His concerns were echoed by other leaders, including Sukhbir Singh Badal of the Akali Dal, who pledged to fight the bill on all fronts, calling it an attack on federalism.