AAP, Congress, and SAD Criticise Centre's Renaming of Chandigarh Adviser's Role as Chief Secretary

The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), Congress, and Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) have criticised the Centre's decision to rename the adviser to the Chandigarh administrator as the chief secretary. They view this as an infringement on Punjab's rightful claim over Chandigarh. The Union Home Ministry has made this change, appointing a senior IAS officer from the AGMUT cadre to the position.

Chandigarh serves as the joint capital for both Punjab and Haryana, with the Punjab governor acting as its administrator. The AAP has strongly opposed this move, arguing it reflects an anti-Punjab stance by the Central government. Neel Garg, an AAP leader, stated that this decision undermines Punjab's claim over Chandigarh.

Political Reactions and Concerns

Garg questioned the necessity of appointing a chief secretary in Chandigarh, which is not a state and lacks a chief minister. He urged the Central government to reconsider and withdraw its decision, emphasising that Chandigarh historically belongs to Punjab. He noted that 27 villages were uprooted to build Chandigarh, and major decisions should involve consultation with Punjab.

Congress leader Partap Singh Bajwa also criticised the Centre's action, describing it as a direct attack on Punjab's legitimate claim over Chandigarh. Bajwa argued that this move is part of a broader agenda to weaken Punjab's position and marginalise its community. He stressed that Chandigarh has always been part of Punjab's rightful claim.

Historical Context and Administrative Changes

Bajwa highlighted that this decision is not just administrative but strategic, aiming to dilute Punjab's rights. He recalled previous actions by the Centre, such as creating a separate cadre for Chandigarh, which weakened the officer posting ratio between Punjab and Haryana. This undermines equal representation in Chandigarh's administration.

The SAD leader Sukhbir Singh Badal warned against proceeding with this re-designation. He stated that transferring Chandigarh to Punjab is a settled issue, with two Union government commissions ruling in favour of Punjab. Badal emphasised that there are no Hindi-speaking areas in Punjab for transfer to Haryana.

Broader Implications and Future Concerns

Bajwa expressed concern over the Centre's efforts to permanently convert Chandigarh into a Union Territory by following Delhi's example. He noted that Chandigarh was meant to be temporarily positioned until transferred to Punjab. Bajwa also questioned Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann's silence on this matter.

Badal further mentioned that the unresolved agenda from the 1966 reorganisation includes restoring Punjab's constitutional rights over river waters and transferring Punjabi-speaking areas left out of the state. He asserted that Punjab seeks only its due rights as guaranteed under the Constitution.

This ongoing dispute highlights significant political tensions between state parties and the central government regarding administrative decisions affecting regional claims and governance structures.