The Centre moved quickly to clarify that a proposed law to change Chandigarh’s administrative structure will not be introduced in the Winter Session of Parliament. The assurance followed unease in Punjab’s political circles after the plan appeared in the provisional list of business.
The controversy began when Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha bulletins listed the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2025, among ten provisional Bills for the session beginning December 1. The draft seeks to bring Chandigarh under Article 240 of the Constitution, which empowers the President to issue regulations for certain Union Territories.
Punjab’s political parties, including the AAP, Congress and Akali Dal, criticised the move. Several BJP leaders in the state also distanced themselves from it and said it did not reflect the Centre’s position.
The Union home ministry later said the government has no plan to introduce the Bill this session. It stated that the proposal is meant only to simplify the process of making Central laws for Chandigarh and does not seek to change the Union territory’s governance structure or the existing arrangements with Punjab and Haryana. It added that no final decision has been taken.
Article 240 enables the President to make regulations for the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, and Dadra and Nagar Haveli. Daman and Diu and Puducherry also fall under its scope if their assemblies are dissolved or suspended.
The reference to Article 240 triggered concerns in Punjab because it was seen as a step toward shifting Chandigarh out of the state’s traditional administrative influence. At present, any change in Chandigarh’s governance requires parliamentary approval; placing it under Article 240 would move key powers to the home ministry. Control over Chandigarh has long been a political and emotional issue in Punjab. Since the Anandpur Sahib Resolution, the state’s parties have argued that Chandigarh should return to Punjab. The Union territory has operated under a system in which officials from both Punjab and Haryana serve on deputation, reflecting its dual status.
Tensions had already been running high after the Centre moved to scrap senate polls in Panjab University, an institution funded by the Centre and both states. Because of its name and origins in the pre-Independence Punjab province, the university carries symbolic weight in the state. After protests by student groups, religious bodies and farmers’ organisations, the decision to revoke the senate and syndicate was reversed earlier this month.
Last year, a statement by BJP leader and former Haryana assembly speaker Gian Chand Gupta added to the anxiety. He said the Union environment ministry had granted clearance for land offered by the Haryana government to the Chandigarh administration in exchange for land meant for a new Haryana Vidhan Sabha complex. The plan, which would have enabled Haryana to build its own Assembly building in Chandigarh instead of sharing the current facility with Punjab, was criticised as strengthening Haryana’s position in the UT. It was later clarified that the proposal had not been finalised.
With state elections less than two years away, any move seen as weakening Punjab’s claim over Chandigarh risks triggering political backlash. The Centre has stepped back twice in recent weeks, first by agreeing to hold Panjab University senate polls and now by signalling wider consultations on Chandigarh’s administrative framework.
The state’s politics has taken a turn since the days of agitation against the three farm bills. Steered by the farmers’ bodies, the mainstream political parties in the state, particularly the Congress, Akali Dal and BJP, faced the brunt, allowing the entry of a third force, the AAP. This was the first time that the bipolar polity of the state had been changed. Any move which will be interpreted as a larger interference of the Centre in the state affairs could again trigger similar protests.
