centre-s-chandigarh-bill-sparks-major-political-row

The Union Government has proposed to bring the Union Territory of Chandigarh within the scope of Article 240 of the Constitution, which authorises the President to frame regulations for certain Union Territories and to legislate directly for them.

The Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2025, is slated to be introduced in the Winter Session of Parliament commencing on December 1, 2025, according to the latest bulletins issued by the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.

 

The legislation aims to insert the Union Territory of Chandigarh in the list of territories covered under Article 240, bringing it in line with other Union Territories that do not have legislatures, namely the Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu, and Puducherry (at times when its Legislative Assembly stands dissolved or suspended).

This amendment would pave the way for the appointment of an independent Administrator for Chandigarh, similar to the arrangement that existed in the past when the UT had an independent Chief Secretary.

 

 

The introduction of the Bill has triggered strong protests from the Congress, Shiromani Akali Dal, and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP).

As per the parliamentary bulletin, the government has listed ten Bills, including this constitutional amendment, for introduction during the forthcoming session.

Article 240 of the Constitution presently empowers the President to make regulations for the peace, progress, and good government of the Union Territories of (1) the Andaman & Nicobar Islands; (2) Lakshadweep; (3) Dadra & Nagar Haveli; (4) Daman & Diu; and (5) Puducherry.

 

The Article, however, provides that once a body is constituted under Article 239A to function as a legislature for the Union Territory (as in the case of Puducherry), the President shall not make any regulation from the date of the first sitting of that legislature.

It further stipulates that any regulation so issued may repeal or amend any Act of Parliament or any existing law applicable to the territory and, when promulgated by the President, shall have the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament applicable to that territory.

Responding sharply to the development, Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann termed it a “grave injustice” and accused the BJP-led Central Government of “conspiring to snatch” Punjab’s capital.

 

“Chandigarh was, is and will always remain an integral part of the state,” Mann said in a statement, emphasising that, as the parent state, Punjab has the sole right to its capital, Chandigarh.

Punjab Congress president and Ludhiana MP Amarinder Singh Raja Warring described the move as “totally uncalled for” and warned that any attempt to “take away” Chandigarh from Punjab would have “serious repercussions”.

 

“Chandigarh belongs to Punjab and any attempt to snatch it away will have serious repercussions,” he said in a statement.

Warring asserted that the Congress would vehemently oppose the Bill in Parliament, would reach out to like-minded parties to block its passage, and urged the Centre to withdraw the proposed amendment. He also asked Punjab BJP leaders to clarify their stand and pressed Chief Minister Mann to immediately engage with the Centre to “nip the proposal in the bud”.

“Whether you are with Punjab or against Punjab will be determined by the position you take today,” he added.

 

Shiromani Akali Dal president Sukhbir Singh Badal called the Bill a “betrayal” of assurances given by the Centre to eventually transfer Chandigarh to Punjab.

In a statement, Badal said the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2025, was designed to permanently remove the Union Territory from Punjab’s administrative and political control.

Terming it an “assault on the rights of Punjab” and a blow to federalism, Badal said the legislation “seeks to end Punjab’s claim to Chandigarh as its capital city.”

AAP Rajya Sabha MP Vikramjit Singh Sahney urged all Punjab lawmakers to jointly approach Union Home Minister Amit Shah, stressing the “historical significance” of Punjab’s claim over Chandigarh.

Quoting a news report in a post on X, Sahney wrote that the Centre was bringing a “politically sensitive” Constitution Amendment Bill to place the Union Territory of Chandigarh under Article 240, akin to several other UTs.“  

“Chandigarh is currently administered by the Punjab Governor, and with the new law, it is likely to be administered by an independent administrator,” he noted.

Underlining that “Punjab’s claims on Chandigarh have historical significance” because Chandigarh was created as Punjab’s capital after Lahore went to Pakistan post-Partition, Sahney recalled that even after Punjab’s reorganisation in 1966, when Chandigarh became the shared capital of Punjab and Haryana, successive accords promised its eventual transfer to Punjab.

 

Also Read: BJP Mahila Morcha protests against AAP

“I request all MPs from Punjab to immediately call upon the Home Minister,” he said.

At present, the Governor of Punjab serves as the Administrator of the Union Territory of Chandigarh. From November 1, 1966 (the date of Punjab’s reorganisation) until May 31, 1984, the UT was administered independently by a Chief Secretary. From June 1, 1984, the arrangement changed and the Punjab Governor became the Administrator, while the Chief Secretary’s post was redesignated as Adviser to the Administrator.

In August 2016, the Centre attempted to revert to an independent Administrator by appointing former IAS officer K J Alphons, but the proposal was rolled back following strong opposition from the then Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal (who was part of the NDA), the Congress, and the AAP.

Chandigarh continues to serve as the joint capital of Punjab and Haryana. Punjab has consistently demanded the complete transfer of Chandigarh to itself, a demand Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann recently reiterated at the Northern Zonal Council meeting held in Faridabad.

 

Also Read: HC pulls up Haryana govt for ill-treating medico