File photo
NEW DELHI: The ministry of home affairs, issuing a clarification over the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, said on Sunday that the central government has “no intention” of introducing the Bill in the upcoming Winter Session of Parliament.The ministry said the intent behind the legislation is to “simplify the Central Government’s law-making process” for the Union Territory of Chandigarh and that the Bill is “still under consideration with the Central Government”.The Bill reportedly aims to bring the Union Territory of Chandigarh under the ambit of Article 240 of the Constitution, a provision that empowers the president to issue regulations and legislate directly for certain Union territories.”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,” the ministry said. “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,” the MHA said.
What’s The Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2025
According to bulletins issued by the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, the government will introduce The Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2025 in the Winter Session of Parliament beginning December 1.The Bill proposes to place Chandigarh in the same constitutional category as Union territories without legislatures, including the Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu, and Puducherry when its assembly is suspended or dissolved.If enacted, the move could pave the way for Chandigarh to once again have an independent administrator, similar to the arrangement that existed when the UT had its own chief secretary.The government has also listed a provisional set of 10 Bills for the coming session, the bulletin noted.Article 240 currently empowers the president to make regulations for specified UTs “for the peace, progress and good governance” of these territories. However, once a legislative body is set up under Article 239A, as in Puducherry, the president’s power to issue such regulations ceases from the date of the legislature’s first sitting. Regulations issued under Article 240 may amend or repeal parliamentary laws applicable to the UT and carry the same authority as an Act of Parliament.
What’s the political row?
AAP MP Vikramjit Singh urged an intervention on the issue, calling the amendment “politically sensitive” and asking all MPs from Punjab to meet Union home minister Amit Shah. Citing media reports, he posted on X that the proposal seeks to bring Chandigarh under Article 240 “like several other UTs”. He also warned that “Chandigarh is currently administered by the Punjab governor, and with the new law, it is likely to be administered by an independent administrator.””Punjab claims on Chandigarh have historical significance. Chandigarh was made capital of Punjab after partition as Lahore went to Pakistan,” he said, recalling that after the 1966 reorganisation of Punjab, the city became the joint capital of Punjab and Haryana. He noted that under multiple accords, the Centre “promised to make Chandigarh the capital of Punjab.” Singh added, “I request all MPs from Punjab to immediately call upon the home minister.”Chandigarh’s administration has shifted over the decades. Initially run by an independent chief secretary after its creation in 1966, the UT came under the administration of the Punjab governor from June 1, 1984, with the chief secretary’s role recast as Adviser to the Administrator. In 2016, the Centre attempted to restore the old model by appointing former IAS officer K J Alphons as administrator, but withdrew the move following protests from then Punjab chief minister Parkash Singh Badal and opposition parties including the Congress and AAP.Punjab continues to assert its claim over Chandigarh, with chief minister Bhagwant Mann reiterating the demand for its immediate transfer during the recent Northern Zonal Council meeting in Faridabad. Go to Source
