Context:

The Union Home Ministry recently stated that the Central Government does not plan to introduce the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2025, in the Winter Session of Parliament. The bill was reportedly linked to bringing Chandigarh under Article 240. The reports had sparked strong political reactions in Punjab, reopening long-standing concerns over Chandigarh’s status dating back to the Punjab Reorganisation Act of 1966.

About Article 240:

Article 240 empowers the President of India to make regulations for “peace, progress and good government” of certain UTs.

·        Such presidential regulations can amend or repeal Acts of Parliament as applicable to that UT.

·        At present, Article 240 is applied to UTs such as Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Dadra & Nagar Haveli & Daman & Diu, and sometimes Puducherry (when its assembly is suspended).

Current Governance Structure of Chandigarh:

Chandigarh is a UT without its own legislature.

·        The Governor of Punjab also serves as the Administrator of Chandigarh, an arrangement that has been in place since 1984.

·        Laws from Punjab and Haryana apply in Chandigarh because of its shared capital status.

What the Proposed Change Would Involve:

According to reports on the 131st Amendment Bill:

1.       Bringing Chandigarh under Article 240

o    This would formally place Chandigarh among those UTs where the President can make regulatory laws.

o    It could enable the appointment of an independent Administrator or Lieutenant Governor, instead of the current arrangement with the Punjab Governor.

2.      Greater Central Control

o    With Article 240 regulations, the Centre could bypass Parliament for certain local laws: these regulations have the same force as Acts of Parliament. This makes law-making more flexible and efficient from the Centre’s point of view.

Key Implications and Challenges:

1.      Federal Tensions & Political Sensitivities

·        Punjab and Haryana may see this as diluting their influence over Chandigarh. Indeed, political leaders have raised concerns that the change threatens their historical stake in the city.

·        The move may be perceived as “centralisation” of power, provoking resistance based on federalist principles.

2.      Democratic Accountability

·        Without a legislative assembly, Chandigarh residents may have less direct democratic control if regulations are framed by the President.

3.     Administrative Efficiency

·        Presidential regulations could accelerate decision-making, especially on urban development, infrastructure, and regulatory reform.

·        It may help cut through bureaucratic delays, since the Centre would no longer need to pass separate Acts in Parliament for UT-specific matters.

Conclusion:

If Chandigarh is brought under Article 240, it would mark a major shift in its constitutional governance — from its current arrangement under the Punjab Governor to direct Presidential regulation. This could bring administrative clarity, faster decision-making, and a more centralized power structure. But it also raises serious questions about democratic representation, federal justice, and political consent, especially given Punjab’s historical and emotional stake in the city.