Punjab CM Mann should come out with logic behind his demand for separate Assembly that is legacy rooted issue

 

AAP should explain logic behind demand for separate Punjab Assembly in Chandigarh

 

Ground Zero

Jagtar Singh

 

Punjab Assembly. High Court of Punjab. Punjab Civil Secretariat.

These were the names of the three building complexes comprising the Capitol Complex in the Punjab’s capital Chandigarh till November 1, 1966.

Haryana came to be added to these three names on November 1, 1966.

Both Punjab Civil Secretariat and Punjab Assembly complexes were divided to accommodate Haryana as the ownership of these buildings was transferred to newly created Union Territory of Chandigarh, the capital of Punjab till then.

The high court continues to be the common link between Punjab and Haryana as the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.

Chandigarh was founded as the capital of Punjab after partition in 1947 as this was the only region that had suffered the loss of its capital during partition of India in 1947 as Lahore went to newly created Pakistan. In this context, the original ownership of the Capitol Complex is with Punjab as Haryana was supposed to move out to a new capital as has been the practice since the reorganisation of states after 1947.

Haryana has thus rightly demanded a separate Assembly and a separate high court.

Punjab as such is not supposed to reciprocate Haryana make similar demands.

No chief minister, not just in Punjab or Haryana but in the entire country, can be considered by be politically naïve.

However, Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann yesterday reacted to the demand from Haryana for allocation of land in Chandigarh for its separate Assembly complex. This issue was raised by Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar at a meeting of  at North Zonal Council. Union Home Minister Amit Shah, who chaired, responded positively. Reaction from Mann, who had deputed his minister to represent Punjab, followed by echoing the same demand. There must be the reason for it.

Earlier, he had demanded separate Punjab high court and this was revealed by his Haryana counterpart as reported by The Hindu in a news datelined April 30: “Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal on Saturday said Haryana and Punjab have demanded the setting up of separate High Courts for both them and regarding this, both would duly send their proposals to the Union Home Ministry. In New Delhi, interacting with the journalists after attending the joint conference of Chief Ministers and the Chief Justices of High Courts, organised by the Ministry of Law and Justice, Mr. Lal stated that the demand for setting up a separate High Court for Haryana was made in the joint conference. “Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann also demanded the setting up of a separate High Court for Punjab.”- The Hindu”.

The status of Chandigarh is one of those highly sensitive but dormant issue associated with Punjab political domain that, if stirred, has the potential to explode in the face.

The transfer of Chandigarh to Punjab and  end to exploitation of river water resources of the state have been two of the most sensitive issues over the decades in this volatile border state on which the Shiromani Akali Dal launched the last agitation on August 4, 1982 known as the “Dharamyudh Morcha” that finally provided political space to radical politics symbolised by Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale. The controversial Satluj Yamuna Canal is part of this river waters narrative whose construction was stopped following gunning down of its senior most engineers by Balwinder Singh Jatana and his associates from Babbar Khalsa in 1990. Sidhu Moosewala’s posthumous song ‘SYL’ banned by the centre resurrected Jatana.

The issue here is that of political perception of AAP so far as the sensitive legacy matters relating to Punjab are concerned.

No chief minister or for that matter any political party in this state can afford to abandon claim over Chandigarh or river waters. No party in this state can oppose the demand for political autonomy.

No AAP leader has so far further elaborated upon the demand for land in Chandigarh for new Punjab Assembly complex. The Punjab Assembly complex is already there!

Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann should have rather welcomed the demand made by his Haryana counterpart with the suggestion that the new state Assembly complex should be constructed by the neighbouring state at a place easily accessible to the people, or in adjoining Panchkula.

Punjab should have opposed allocation of land to Haryana in Chandigarh for this purpose.

Punjab should have also welcomed Haryana demanding its independent high court rather than making similar demand.

AAP narrative counters the legacy narrative associated with Punjab and this domain is highly sensitive. Sangrur result in Lok Sabha by-election is a lesson for AAP.

AAP should now come with rationale for Mann making such demands that are perceived as anti-Punjab.

Punjab’s religio-political domain is not only different from all other states and regions in India but also too sensitive to be played with.

Arvind Kejriwal as the AAP chief should make his party stand clear on these issues.

People of Punjab had brought AAP with unprecedented mandate by rejecting the Congress and dumping the Shiromani Akali Dal.

These people have the right to understand the thinking of AAP behind these demands that change the entire legacy narrative.

By the way, Punjab Assembly complex has a roof-top open air theatre too.