Mohali’s municipal limits debate: More than a cartographic exercise

For years, development in Mohali was largely state-led through GMADA and the Punjab Small Industries & Export Corporation. But private colonisers, operating under the Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act (PAPRA), now dominate. PAPRA makes developers responsible for maintenance for five years, after which it should shift to residents’ associations. In reality, most associations are weak or absent, leaving a vacuum in civic upkeep. The result is a push from residents of private estates for predictable municipal maintenance and taxation clarity.

A related blind spot is the failure to enforce the 10 per cent housing quota for economically weaker sections (EWS) under PAPRA. Despite central and state schemes, EWS housing in Mohali remains minimal. As new areas are considered for inclusion, this missing constituency—those on the periphery both geographically and socially—must be brought into the policy frame through transparent timelines and compliance.

Law, land, and competing claims

The fiercest resistance to boundary expansion is not about taxes but land. Under Punjab law, once a gram panchayat’s entire jurisdiction is merged with a municipal body, its assets and liabilities—including valuable shamlat (common) lands—automatically vest in the municipality, and the panchayat ceases to exist. This legal trigger explains why tempers run high in villages like Balongi and Badmajra, where common land represents both revenue and local power. Any full inclusion here would instantly transfer control of these assets to the corporation, turning a boundary change into a political realignment.

On the governance side, GMADA builds, but the municipal corporation must maintain. When infrastructure is complete, the municipal corporation assumes responsibility and gains the right to levy taxes. If this sequence is reversed—taxing before full services are in place—public backlash is inevitable.

AAP MLA Kulwant Singh, who also heads Janta Land Promoters, has articulated the state’s responsibility as “service first, tax later”. His critique of GMADA’s performance underscores a widely felt grievance that revenue generation has outpaced on-ground delivery. Mohali Mayor Amarjit Singh Sidhu, however, argues the expansion is overdue and reflects residents’ demand for regularised civic services under an elected body. He has accused the Government of “tampering with democracy” by excluding major sectors that were part of the municipal corporation’s original resolution. The BJP, meanwhile, calls for fixing civic performance before enlarging jurisdiction, pointing to chronic sanitation and drainage issues.

Each position reflects a facet of the same problem: the widening gap between urban growth and the institutions meant to manage it.

A framework for credible expansion

The path forward lies in sequencing and transparency. Before notification, the Government must publish a clear handover checklist for every proposed inclusion area—detailing completion of roads, water supply, sewerage, lighting, and amenities. It should apply the law uniformly, including all contiguous urbanised panchayats in full rather than fragmentary carve-ins designed to avoid full vesting of assets. For shamlat lands, a public trust mechanism within the municipal corporation could ensure that lease proceeds are ring-fenced for local development.

Property and service taxes should be phased in only after measurable benchmarks—garbage collection, streetlights, water supply—are met. GMADA-municipal corporation fund transfers and arrears must be settled to stabilise civic finances, while PAPRA’s 10 per cent EWS quota should finally be enforced. Maintenance responsibilities for private-developed sectors must also be properly transferred after the five-year liability period ends.

Equally vital is genuine consultation. The current 15-day window for objections is inadequate after years of delay. A credible process requires structured public hearings over at least two months, ward-wise impact notes, and a five-year perspective plan outlining both capital and maintenance costs.

A fair expansion would include entire urbanised panchayats, ensure transparent vesting of assets, transfer completed infrastructure only after inspection, and protect common lands through accountable trusts. Above all, it must recognise tenants and EWS households—not just property owners—as stakeholders.

The test for Punjab’s urban governance

Mohali does not need another boundary. It needs a sequence that citizens can trust: build first, vest transparently, maintain consistently, and tax fairly. If the final notification integrates law, infrastructure, and inclusion—and addresses the shamlat issue head-on—it could mark a genuine turning point in Punjab’s urban governance. Otherwise, the exercise risks becoming yet another case where politics draws the map, but people pay the price.

(K B S Sidhu is a former special chief secretary of Punjab.)