The Union Home Ministry moved on November 22, 2025, to address the mounting political anxiety in Punjab by clarifying that the contentious proposal to bring the Union Territory of Chandigarh under Article 240 of the Constitution remains strictly “under consideration” and that the Central government has not made any final decision.
In an official statement shared via the PIB-Home Ministry handle on X, the government emphasised that the plan is intended merely to simplify the process of extending and making Central laws applicable to the Union Territory.
Crucially, the statement stressed that the move is not aimed at altering Chandigarh’s existing governance framework nor its “traditional relationship” with the states of Punjab or Haryana.
The clarification followed earlier reports suggesting the government intended to align Chandigarh with other Union Territories that operate without their own legislatures, such as the Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, and Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu, or Puducherry during phases of Assembly dissolution.
This reported proposal immediately ignited a strong and unified political backlash across Punjab’s political spectrum, which views any attempt to change Chandigarh’s status as an infringement on Punjab’s historical and territorial claims.
Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann led the condemnation, describing the potential move as a “grave injustice” and accusing the BJP-led NDA government of “conspiring to snatch” Punjab’s rightful capital. Mann unequivocally asserted the historical claim, stating that Chandigarh “was, is and will always remain” an integral part of Punjab.
Echoing this sentiment, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) convener and former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal argued that the proposal fundamentally “tears apart the federal structure” of the country, reaffirming the position that “Chandigarh belongs to Punjab and will remain with Punjab.”
The opposition in Punjab also quickly mobilised against the idea. Punjab Congress president Amarinder Singh Raja Warring termed the plan “totally uncalled-for,” warning of “serious repercussions” and vowing to work to block any legislative Bill related to the change in Parliament.
Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) chief Sukhbir Singh Badal characterised the move as a direct “assault on the rights of Punjab” and invoked the legacy of the unfulfilled Rajiv-Longowal Accord, which pertains to the transfer of Chandigarh to Punjab.
Notably, even the state chief of the ruling party’s ally, Punjab BJP chief Sunil Jakhar, publicly opposed the proposal, stating that the Union Territory “is an integral part of Punjab” and firmly reaffirming the party line: “for us, Punjab always comes first.”
Currently, the administration of Chandigarh operates under the authority of the Governor of Punjab, a system that has been in place since June 1, 1984. Despite the Centre’s attempts to downplay the significance of the “under consideration” tag, the controversy highlights the deep political sensitivities surrounding the capital’s constitutional status among all political stakeholders in Punjab.
Comments