Chandigarh: The Haryana assembly unanimously adopted an official resolution reiterating the state’s right over Chandigarh, its capital, a move that comes four days after the April 1 resolution by the Punjab assembly urging the Union government for a “complete transfer of Chandigarh to Punjab.”
Cutting across party lines and displaying a rare show of unity, the majority of the legislators of the 90-member Vidhan Sabha dubbed as a “political ploy” the Punjab assembly resolution, spearheaded by that state’s new Aam Aadmi Party government.
“This house notes with concern the resolution passed in the Legislative Assembly of Punjab on April 1, 2022 recommending that the matter for transfer of Chandigarh to Punjab be taken up with the Central government,” read the Haryana resolution moved by chief minister Manohar Lal Khattar that was adopted unanimously by the House.
Punjab’s April 1 resolution is the latest in the long history of the fight for Chandigarh - a low-intensity sparring that has played out since Haryana was carved out of Punjab on November 1, 1966. Back then it was decided that the two states would share Chandigarh, which would be made into a Union territory, as capital, although there have been at least two separate Union government decisions to transfer Chandigarh completely to Punjab.
After a three-and-a-half-hour debate during which legislators vociferously attacked the newly formed AAP government in Punjab and repeatedly said its resolution was a deep-rooted conspiracy, the Haryana assembly said: “This is not acceptable to the people of Haryana. Haryana continues to retain its right to the Capital Territory of Chandigarh.” It urged the Union government not to take any steps “under these circumstances” that would disturb the existing balance.
Former Haryana chief minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda set stage for the discussion saying Punjab’s resolution was not only meaningless but also a “political gimmick” and that while the state’s role only as an elder brother (to Haryana) was acceptable that of “big brother” was not.
