The Central government has withdrawn a controversial Constitution amendment Bill that would have allowed direct governance of Chandigarh Union Territory, following strong resistance from within the Punjab BJP unit that warned of potential law and order problems in the sensitive border state.
Internal Opposition Forces Rollback
According to exclusive information, the Centre decided to abort the plan after receiving negative feedback from senior Punjab BJP leaders who expressed inability to explain the decision to the people of Punjab. The leaders highlighted the "sentimental attachment" Punjabis have with Chandigarh and the existing "sense of suspicion and distrust" among large sections of the Sikh community following the controversial farm laws of 2020-21.
Sources revealed that an informal note detailing the reasons and benefits of the Bill was circulated to Punjab BJP leaders on Saturday, November 23, 2025. However, the response from state party leaders was overwhelmingly negative, with warnings that the move would be seen as "unnecessary provocation" and could turn the law and order situation volatile.
Timing and Rationale Questioned
Punjab BJP leaders were reportedly "at a loss" to understand the timing of the move, given that Assembly elections in the state are just over a year away. This comes at a time when Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been making repeated attempts to reach out to the Sikh community.
"We are organising functions to commemorate the 350th Shaheedi Diwas of Guru Tegh Bahadur. Prime Minister Modi is participating in an event in Kurukshetra... But I don't understand the reason for this unnecessary needling every now and then," a senior BJP leader expressed privately.
The leader further noted that anger over the Centre's move to trim Panjab University's decision-making bodies had hardly subsided when this new proposal emerged, reinforcing perceptions of Delhi's "high-handedness."
What the Bill Proposed
The Constitution amendment Bill sought to bring Chandigarh under Article 240 of the Constitution, which would enable the government to frame laws specifically tailored for the Union Territory's unique needs through Presidential orders, without requiring Parliamentary intervention for minor changes.
The explanatory note argued that while Parliament currently has authority to make laws for Chandigarh, no specific laws have been created for Chandigarh's needs since 1966, except the Punjab Reorganisation Act 1966 and Chandigarh (Delegation of Powers) Act 1987. This has resulted in Chandigarh having to extend laws passed by other states, often leading to unsuitable legislation.
The proposal emphasized that bringing Chandigarh under Article 240 would:
- Provide a modern legal framework comparable to other Union Territories
- Enable Presidential modifications to various provisions under the Punjab Reorganisation Act
- Streamline governance and ensure legal adaptability
- Maintain Chandigarh's status as shared capital of Punjab and Haryana
The Centre maintained that the constitutional status, capital role, and administrative framework would remain unchanged, with no impact on health services, local services, or law and order structures.
Political Sensitivities Prevail
Despite these assurances, the political reality proved overwhelming. The majority view in Punjab has always been that Chandigarh should be given to Punjab, and any attempt to change its governance structure was bound to be viewed with suspicion.
The feedback from Punjab BJP leaders made it clear that the rationale behind such a decision, however genuine, would be lost on the Punjabi-speaking population, who would perceive it as the Centre "tinkering with Chandigarh."
This episode highlights the continuing sensitivity around Centre-State relations in Punjab, particularly in the aftermath of the farm laws controversy, and demonstrates how internal party feedback can influence major policy decisions at the national level.
