Chandigarh: A day after the Centre proposed bringing Chandigarh under Article 240 of the Constitution—which would empower the President to frame regulations and legislate directly for the Union Territory—the Ministry of Home Affairs clarified its position. An MHA statement Sunday said the proposal was made only to “simplify” the Centre’s law-making process for Chandigarh—the joint Capital of Punjab and Haryana.
All political parties in Punjab, barring the BJP, saw Saturday’s bulletin as an insidious attempt of the BJP-led Centre to “wrench away Chandigarh”. Warning of “unprecedented protests”, Punjab’s parties even started gearing up for an “appropriate response”.
As the issue snowballed, the MHA went into damage control mode. “A suitable decision will 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,” said its statement.
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…
— PIB – Ministry of Home Affairs (@PIBHomeAffairs) November 23, 2025
Experts, however, opine that any move to include Chandigarh in Article 240 cannot be construed as an innocuous “tweaking” of the law to govern a city better, as the MHA has projected in its clarification. The move, point out experts, also does not entail a mere change in Chandigarh’s administrator from Punjab Governor to Lieutenant Governor, but a “fundamental and major legal transformation in the structure of governance”.
Senior advocate of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and constitutional expert Anupam Gupta told ThePrint that, put simply, bringing Chandigarh under Article 240 would change who makes laws for the UT. It would mean that the Centre—specifically the Ministry of Home Affairs—would replace Parliament as the primary source and instrument of legal governance for Chandigarh.
“The centre of gravity of law-making for Chandigarh would shift dramatically from the Parliament to the MHA. Both literally and effectively, MHA would rule Chandigarh to the exclusion of any other authority,” said Gupta.
Retired Punjab bureaucrat K.B.S. Sidhu wrote in his blog Saturday that for Delhi’s legal drafters, the proposal might look like an elegant way to “streamline” Chandigarh’s governance. However, “for Punjab, it looks very much like a constitutional ambush”.
Sidhu added, “Placing Chandigarh under Article 240 is not about improving municipal water supply or building a smarter traffic grid. It is about who, truly, controls the city, whose voice counts in shaping its laws, and whether Punjab’s historic claim can be quietly buried under the soothing phrase ‘peace, progress and good government’.”
Article 240 & what it will change
Article 240 grants power to make regulations for the peace, progress and effective governance of UTs to the President. The UTs of Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Dadra and Nagar Haveli are already in Article 240. Daman and Diu and Puducherry, if their legislative assemblies remain suspended or are dissolved, also come within the scope of Article 240.
Earlier, the bulletin said the move to include Chandigarh in Article 240 “will open the door to an independent administrator in the Union Territory of Chandigarh”. “The Punjab Governor is currently the administrator of Chandigarh.”
Experts point out that Article 240 need not be amended if only a change in the administrator is required.
“Even now, there is no constitutional prohibition against such a change. Article 239 (2) of the Constitution allows the President of India to appoint the Governor of a state as the administrator of an adjoining Union Territory,” said Gupta. “This course of action, however, is not mandatory, and the long-standing practice of appointing Punjab’s Governor as the administrator of the UT of Chandigarh—though—remains anchored in Article 239 (2).”
“In any case, any interpretation of Article 239 (2) as mandatory, not merely permissive, would necessitate an amendment of Article 239 only, not Article 240,” he stated.
The change in the nomenclature of the administrator from Governor to L-G may be politically significant, but from the legal point of view, it is of secondary importance, Gupta pointed out. The impact and consequences of the proposed amendment are the centrepieces of the change being sought, he asserted.
Chandigarh’s position and status, following the 1966 reorganisation, has been defined by the Punjab Reorganisation Act 1966, according to Gupta. Moreover, until now, “Chandigarh has been governed by a 1952 legislation, called the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, along with the rules and regulations framed under it”, he said.
“The proposed constitutional amendment, aiming to include Chandigarh in Article 240 of the Constitution, will fundamentally alter the situation,” added Gupta.
Under Clause 2 of Article 240, any regulations introduced by the President for a UT have the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament. Such regulations may also repeal or amend any Act of Parliament or any other law applicable to the UT.
“If Chandigarh is added to the UTs in Article 240, any regulations made by the President (read the Centre) for Chandigarh can repeal or amend any parliamentary law, applicable to Chandigarh. This includes the Punjab Reorganisation Act. It can also repeal or amend any other law applicable to Chandigarh—the 1952 Capital of Punjab Act, as well as the Punjab University Act 1947,” said Gupta.
Gupta also said the principal vice of the proposed amendment was that it would empower the MHA to repeal or extensively amend the Punjab Reorganisation Act relating to Chandigarh, something portentous for the region. “The slightest whisper of Parliament repealing or amending the Punjab Reorganisation Act would precipitate furious protest and debate in Parliament and on the streets. In case the proposed constitutional amendment succeeds, the same change can be brought by quiet bureaucratic law-making, far removed from the heat and din of Parliament,” he said.
He added that apart from the Punjab Reorganisation Act, the 1952 Capital of Punjab Act would also be directly impacted by such an amendment. Section 1(2) of the 1952 Act provides that “it extends to the city of Chandigarh, which shall comprise the area of the site of the capital of Punjab as notified by the government of Punjab before the 1st November 1966, and to such areas as may be notified by the central government from time to time”.
“While the body of provisions of the 1952 Act largely relate to sale, lease/allotment and construction of buildings, etc, the historic significance of the Act lies in its title and Section 1(2),” said Gupta. “The fear that even this may be altered by the MHA in the guise of making regulations under Article 240 for Chandigarh is not without basis.”
According to the blog by Sidhu, Chandigarh is currently governed through a layered mechanism. “Parliament extends suitable Punjab laws to the Union Territory or enacts specific legislation for it. This is time-consuming and sometimes clumsy, but it does one crucial thing: it forces a measure of parliamentary debate. Punjab’s MPs can object, negotiate, demand amendments, or at least, put their protest on record. Once Chandigarh is written into Article 240, that modest but real leverage evaporates.”
“Law for the city will largely come by presidential regulation, drafted in North Block, notified in the Gazette, and implemented by a bureaucracy that does not answer to Chandigarh’s residents or Punjab’s legislature. Parliament will retain theoretical supremacy, but in day-to-day governance, it will be the President’s regulations—in effect, the Union Cabinet’s will that rules,” wrote Sidhu.
(Edited by Madhurita Goswami)
Also Read: Akal Takht summons Punjab minister over ‘sacrilegious’ depiction of 10th Sikh Guru in painting