Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill 2025 row: Following an uproar, the Home Ministry announced on Sunday (November 23) that no Bill to alter the status of Chandigarh would be introduced in the Winter Session of Parliament next month.
Earlier, a bulletin of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha had stated that the Centre would introduce The Constitution (131 Amendment) Bill 2025 in the upcoming session, to include Chandigarh under Article 240 of the Constitution. This had led to the Aam Aadmi Party and the Congress accusing the Centre of trying to “weaken” Punjab’s claim over Chandigarh.
What is Chandigarh’s current status, and why was Punjab aggrieved over the proposed change to it? What is the unique history of Chandigarh? We explain, in three points.
What was the change proposed?
Chandigarh is a Union Territory (UT), but is also the shared capital of Punjab and Haryana. The Governor of Punjab currently holds additional charge as the Administrator of the UT of Chandigarh.
Bringing Chandigarh under the ambit of Article 240 of the Constitution would pave the way for the city to get an independent administrator, like the Lieutenant Governor (L-G) in many other UTs.
Article 240 of the Constitution lays down the power of the President of India to make regulations for certain Union territories. It says the “President may make regulations for the peace, progress and good government” of the Union territory of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands; Lakshadweep; Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu; and Puducherry when its Legislative Assembly is dissolved or suspended.
“Any regulation so made may repeal or amend any Act made by Parliament or any other law which is for the time being applicable to the Union territory and, when promulgated by the President, shall have the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament which applies to that territory,” the Act says.
If Chandigarh comes under this Act, it will not remain under the Punjab Governor in the manner it is now.
What has the Centre said now?
In a post on X, the Home Ministry said, “The proposal only to simplify the Central Government’s law-making process for the Union Territory of Chandigarh is still under consideration with the Central Government. No final decision has been taken on this proposal. The proposal in no way seeks to alter Chandigarh’s governance or administrative structure, nor does it aim to change the traditional arrangements between Chandigarh and the States of Punjab or Haryana.”
It added that a decision would be taken only after “adequate consultations with all stakeholders, keeping in mind the interests of Chandigarh”.
“There is no need for any concern on this matter. The Central Government has no intention of introducing any Bill to this effect in the upcoming Winter Session of Parliament,” the post said.
Why is Punjab opposing Chandigarh’s change of status?
Chandigarh, a planned city built after Independence, has a unique significance for Punjab. It was built as a replacement for Lahore, the united Punjab’s capital that went to Pakistan after Partition.
After Partition, Shimla was made the temporary capital of Indian Punjab. But then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru envisioned a modern city as the capital of the state — giving birth to the idea of Chandigarh. In March 1948, the Centre and the state government chose a location next to the foothills of the Himalayas for the construction of the planned city. As many as 22 villages in Kharar were acquired for the construction.
The master plan for the city was developed by Le Corbusier, regarded as one of the pioneers of modernist architecture. “The City of Beauty” officially became the capital of Punjab on September 21, 1953. Then President Rajendra Prasad inaugurated the new capital shortly after, on October 7 that year.
Punjab faced another division when the Hindi-speaking, Hindu-majority state of Haryana was carved out under The Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966.
Chandigarh, which lay at the border of the two states, became their common capital, with properties divided in a 60:40 ratio. It was also given the status of a UT, which brought the city under direct control of the Centre.
At that time, then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had announced that Haryana would get its own capital. There was even a brief proposal to divide Chandigarh into two parts, which was rejected.
On January 29, 1970, the Centre announced that “the capital project area of Chandigarh should, as a whole, go to Punjab.” The government of the day was forced to make this announcement when Fateh Singh, leader of the Punjabi Suba movement, threatened self-immolation if Chandigarh was not transferred to Punjab.
But Haryana was given temporary accommodation for running offices in Punjab’s civil secretariat and also space in Punjab’s Vidhan Sabha. The state was told to use the office and residential accommodation in Chandigarh for five years until it built its own capital. The Centre offered Haryana a grant of Rs 10 crore and a loan of the equivalent amount to Haryana for building a new capital.
But close to six decades have passed since Haryana was carved out, and Chandigarh remains the joint capital much to the displeasure of Punjab, which has long maintained that its claim over the entirety of the city is “undisputed”.
On Saturday (November 22), Punjab CM Bhagwant Mann repeated this claim when he said, “We will not allow the conspiracy to succeed. Chandigarh, built by uprooting the villages of Punjab, belongs solely to Punjab. We will not let our right slip away… We will take whatever steps are necessary.”
Constitution 131st amendment bill 2025: Boats decorated with Tricolour balloons for Independence Day at Sukhna Lake in Chandigarh. (Express photo: Jasbir Malhi) 
Share
