Published on: 23 November, 2025 14:32 IST
The Union government has proposed bringing the Union Territory of Chandigarh under the ambit of Article 240 of the Constitution, a provision that empowers the President of India to issue regulations having the force of parliamentary law for certain Union Territories.
The proposal forms part of the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2025, listed for introduction in the upcoming Winter Session of Parliament beginning December 1.
According to the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha bulletins, the amendment seeks to align Chandigarh’s constitutional status with that of other Union Territories without legislatures, such as the Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu, and under specific circumstances Puducherry, when its Assembly is dissolved or suspended.
At present, Chandigarh is administered under Article 239, with the Administrator being the Governor of Punjab. Bringing it under Article 240 would revive the model of an independent Administrator, a system that existed between 1966 and 1984 when the UT had its own chief secretary functioning independently of the Punjab Secretariat.
After 1984, the Governor of Punjab was designated ex-officio Administrator of Chandigarh and the chief secretary’s post was converted into the Adviser to the Administrator.
Article 240, as it stands today, empowers the President to make regulations “for the peace, progress and good government” of specified Union Territories. These regulations may amend or repeal existing Parliamentary laws applicable to those territories and take effect as if enacted by Parliament itself.
However, the President’s power ceases in territories that have legislative assemblies, once their legislatures begin functioning such as Puducherry under Article 239A. Chandigarh currently does not have a legislature of its own and is jointly the capital of Punjab and Haryana.
The proposed amendment is part of a list of ten Bills the government intends to introduce in the forthcoming session. While the Bill’s text has not yet been made public, constitutional experts note that extending Article 240 to Chandigarh would place the UT squarely within a category of Union Territories in which the Union executive exercises direct legislative authority, subject to parliamentary oversight and judicial review. Such an arrangement has precedent in the constitutional design for small or strategically significant UTs.
Chandigarh’s administrative status has been shaped by historical events, including its establishment as the capital of Punjab after the Partition, followed by the reorganisation of Punjab in 1966, when Chandigarh was designated a Union Territory and simultaneously became the joint capital of Punjab and Haryana.
Over the decades, various political agreements and discussions—such as the Rajiv–Longowal Accord of 1985 referred to the future transfer of Chandigarh to Punjab, though these commitments were never implemented.
While political parties in Punjab have expressed objections, arguing that the move affects the state’s historical claim over the city, the core constitutional question concerns whether Chandigarh should continue under Article 239 with a Governor-cum-Administrator model, or shift to a system where the President directly exercises regulatory powers under Article 240, similar to smaller Union Territories.
Legal scholars point out that the amendment, if passed, would not alter Chandigarh’s status as a Union Territory but would change the manner in which laws applicable to it are framed potentially allowing faster administrative decisions, executive-issued regulations with the force of law, and a more uniform governance model with other UTs lacking legislatures.
Chandigarh’s dual role as the capital of both Punjab and Haryana remains unchanged by the proposed amendment. The city continues to function as a shared administrative centre, and any legislative or constitutional modification to its governance structure would not, on its own, resolve the long-standing territorial claims of either state. The Punjab Governor, for now, continues to serve as the Administrator of Chandigarh, as has been the practice since 1984.
The Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill will clarify the Union government’s intent once formally tabled, including whether it seeks to purely extend presidential regulatory authority or undertake any wider changes to the UT’s governance architecture. Parliamentary debate in the Winter Session will determine whether the proposal is adopted and how it might reshape the constitutional relationship between the Centre, the UT, and the neighbouring states that use Chandigarh as their capital.