Chandigarh, Nov. 23 -- The Union government is preparing to introduce the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2025, in the upcoming winter session of Parliament - a move that could alter Chandigarh's administrative structure and have vast consequences for Punjab's claim and association with Chandigarh, the state capital. The development has triggered a political storm in Punjab, with the ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and the Opposition Congress and Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) alleging that it is an attempt to "snatch Chandigarh from Punjab". According to the Bill listed in the Rajya Sabha bulletin, the proposal seeks to bring the Union territory of Chandigarh under Article 240 of the Constitution, placing it in the same category as Union territories without legislatures - including the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu, and Puducherry (when its assembly is dissolved or suspended). If enacted, the amendment would empower the President to frame regulations for Chandigarh, and is widely seen as paving the way for the appointment of a lieutenant governor to administer the city. This would mark a significant shift from the current arrangement, under which the Punjab governor serves as Chandigarh's administrator. Before the present system, Chandigarh had a chief commissioner who reported directly to the Union home ministry. The post was abolished in 1984 at the peak of militancy in Punjab and replaced with an adviser to the Punjab governor, who was given the charge of the UT administrator. In August 2016, the Centre had sought to restore the old practice of having an independent administrator by appointing former IAS officer KJ Alphons for the top post. However, the move was withdrawn after stiff opposition from the then chief minister Parkash Singh Badal. A retired bureaucrat said the proposed shift "has political and administrative implications, particularly for Punjab, which has long claimed Chandigarh as its capital", though he added that the Centre already has the power to enact laws for Chandigarh. At present, the Punjab governor holds a largely symbolic role as administrator. "What the Centre ultimately intends will become clear once the full Bill is tabled," he said. Chief minister Bhagwant Mann strongly opposed the proposal, accusing the BJP-led NDA government of conspiring to "snatch Chandigarh" from Punjab. "Chandigarh was, is and will always remain an integral part of the state," he said, asserting that Punjab has the sole right over its capital. Mann termed the amendment a "grave injustice" and a continuation of the Centre's alleged attempts to undermine Punjab. Punjab Congress president Amarinder Singh Raja Warring and Leader of Opposition Partap Singh Bajwa also denounced the move, calling it an assault on Punjab's rights. Warring warned that removing Chandigarh from Punjab's purview "will have serious repercussions" and vowed that the Congress would oppose the legislation in Parliament. Bajwa accused the Union government of systematically eroding Punjab's rights - "whether on Chandigarh, river waters, or Panjab University." Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) president Sukhbir Singh Badal appealed to the Centre not to introduce the Bill, saying it would "betray brave Punjabis who have sacrificed the most for the nation". He said the proposal would permanently remove Chandigarh from Punjab's administrative control and violate past commitments - including the Centre's 1970 decision to transfer Chandigarh to Punjab and the Rajiv-Longowal Accord, which set January 1986 as the deadline for the transfer. A former Punjab-cadre IAS officer, however, argued that bringing Chandigarh under Article 240 rather than Article 239 would not alter its administrative status. "It will remain a Union territory," he said, adding that the amendment does not mandate the appointment of a separate administrator. He noted that even now there is no constitutional guarantee that the Punjab governor must be the ex-officio administrator of Chandigarh - it has merely been the practice since Punjab's reorganisation in 1966. The Centre, if it wished, could change this arrangement without passing a special law, though such a move would be unwise given political sensitivities. The officer said Article 240 simply empowers the President to make regulations for UTs without legislatures, giving such regulations the force of law. "The intent appears to be smoother administrative functioning backed by legal clarity rather than modifying Chandigarh's status," he said, calling the political rhetoric "misplaced." He added that Chandigarh's association with Punjab as its original capital "was settled long ago and reaffirmed repeatedly," saying that Punjab retains a natural and historical right over the city that no constitutional amendment can alter....