Sharma’s comments were prompted by remarks from the Leader of the Opposition in the Punjab Assembly, Partap Singh Bajwa, who asserted that the proposed Bill — Constitution Bill, 2025 — dealing with Chandigarh’s governance framework was being used by the Centre to provoke instability in Punjab and pave the way for governor’s rule. In response, Sharma accused Bajwa’s party of hypocrisy, saying: “The Congress party, which toppled the elected governments in Punjab seven times and imposed Governor’s Rule, now has its Leader of the Opposition speculating that the BJP may impose Governor’s Rule. This does not suit him.”
Sharma insisted that between 1951 and 1992 there were seven occasions when President’s Rule was imposed in Punjab under Congress-led state administrations — a tally he said pointed to past centralisation driven by internal party strife rather than genuine crisis. He rejected the notion that the current BJP-led Centre was seeking to destabilise the state, framing the opposition’s narrative as a political campaign rather than a fact-based concern.
The proposed amendment has triggered broad dissent within Punjab’s political circles. The Home Ministry clarified that no final decision on the Bill has been taken and that it does not intend to bring it up during the forthcoming parliamentary session. The Ministry emphasised that the proposal, still under consideration, is meant only to simplify the law-making process for Chandigarh and does not aim to change its governance or the arrangement with Punjab and Haryana.
Bajwa challenged this explanation, arguing that the mere listing of the Bill in parliamentary notifications had already raised a red flag. He claimed that the Delhi government’s approach was intended to provoke protest in Punjab, which could then be used as a pretext for imposing governor’s rule and centralising control. He cited the long-standing dispute over water sharing and administrative rights as part of a perceived pattern of Delhi intervention in state affairs.
The controversy comes at a sensitive moment for Punjab. The state’s demand for full control over Chandigarh remains unresolved, even though the city has served as the shared capital of Punjab and Haryana since 1966. The Bill’s listing prompted widespread mobilization among Punjab’s political parties, with the Shiromani Akali Dal convening an emergency committee meeting to prepare a response.