Placing Chandigarh under Article 240 could end Punjab-Haryana administrative influence, empower the Centre, and reshape the city’s future governance structure.
What Is Article 240 and Why It Matters
Article 240 of the Indian Constitution grants the President of India the power to make regulations for the peace, progress, and good governance of certain Union Territories (UTs). These include:
- Andaman & Nicobar Islands
- Lakshadweep
- Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu
- Puducherry (when its legislature is suspended)
If Chandigarh is added to this list, the President, through executive regulation, could amend or repeal existing laws governing the city—without needing Parliamentary approval.
Current Governance: A Shared, Hybrid Model
Chandigarh has a unique administrative setup:
- It is a Union Territory, but also serves as the shared capital of Punjab and Haryana.
- The Governor of Punjab holds additional charge as Administrator of Chandigarh.
- Consequently, laws from both Punjab and Haryana extend to the city in various areas.
This setup has helped manage administrative overlaps, especially regarding civil services, education, and land laws.
Key Implications of Bringing Chandigarh Under Article 240
1. Complete Central Control Over Local Laws
- Currently, changes to laws in Chandigarh require Parliamentary action.
- Under Article 240, the President could issue regulations to amend or repeal laws directly, bypassing the legislative process.
- Example: Changing the mayor’s tenure or modifying local governance rules would require just a signed regulation, not a debate in Parliament.
2. End of Punjab-Haryana Influence
- The move would dilute Punjab and Haryana’s administrative link with the city.
- Their historical and political claims over Chandigarh—particularly from Punjab—would lose ground.
- This could spark fresh tensions, given both states have long seen Chandigarh as integral to their identity.
3. Possibility of an Independent Administrator or L-G
- The Centre may appoint a dedicated Administrator, similar to Lieutenant Governors in Delhi or Puducherry.
- This would end the dual role of the Punjab Governor, breaking a system that’s been in place since 1984.
4. Future Legislative Assembly for Chandigarh?
- Supporters, like BJP leader Arun Sood, argue the move may pave the way for a separate Legislative Assembly, granting the UT greater autonomy and possibly increased budgetary support from the Centre.
Why the Current System Exists
The Punjab Governor’s dual charge was introduced in 1984, during a period of terrorist insurgency in Punjab, to ensure security coordination.
Before that, Chandigarh was governed by a Chief Commissioner, a bureaucrat reporting to the Union government.
Some, like former MP Pawan Bansal, argue that the current model has worked well for 40 years and only requires democratic strengthening at the local level—not a constitutional overhaul.
“What’s really needed is an empowered Mayor-in-Council system with real authority,” he stated.
Political Sensitivities and Historical Baggage
Any change in Chandigarh’s governance is deeply sensitive, especially for Punjab, which continues to claim the city as its own.
Attempts to alter this arrangement—like in 2016, when the Centre tried to appoint K J Alphons as an independent Administrator—have faced strong political resistance, particularly from Punjab-based parties.
Bringing Chandigarh under Article 240 would mark a major shift in its governance, giving the Centre unilateral control over regulations while likely weakening state-level influence. While it may streamline administration and even lead to greater autonomy, it could also trigger political opposition, especially from Punjab, and reopen longstanding territorial debates.
