Arguments over status of Chandigarh continue

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, September 9

The arguments over the status of Chandigarh as the capital of Punjab and Haryana continue. More than 50 years after Chandigarh came into being, the Centre today told the Punjab and Haryana High Court that the city was neither a part of Punjab nor Haryana from the territorial point of view.

Appearing before the Bench, Additional Solicitor-General of India Satya Pal Jain submitted: “Chandigarh is a union territory and a capital of both Punjab and Haryana. However, from the territorial point of view, it is neither a part of Punjab nor of Haryana”.

He, at the same time, sought additional time to file a detailed reply on the issue. Taking a note of his submissions, the Bench fixed September 23 as the next date of hearing in the matter.

The Bench had earlier asked Punjab and Haryana to come out with some document to show that the city was the capital of the two states. The query came during the hearing of a petition filed by an advocate seeking reservation in the two states by virtue of him being a city resident.

The case, as such, was being dubbed as “unique” as the petitioner was seeking reservation in both states for recruitment in the superior judiciary on the basis of his being an SC candidate in Chandigarh, which in turn was the capital of the two states.

The Bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain and Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi came out with the query as a person declared SC candidate in one state was not necessarily considered the same in another state.

The Bench, during the course of the hearing, had called for the advocates-general of both states. They were asked to come out with any notification, letter, or any other document that showed Chandigarh was the capital. The developments took place on a petition filed by Phool Singh against the Punjab and Haryana High Court and other respondents through senior counsel Rajiv Atma Ram and Arjun Partap Atma Ram. The High Court was represented in the matter by senior counsel Manisha Gandhi and Swati Batra.

The Bench, among other things, was told that the petitioner was an advocate, who appeared for recruitment in the superior judiciary in both Punjab and Haryana. 

He cleared the preliminary examination for the post of Additional District and Sessions Judge, but could not make it in the mains. The Bench was told that he was treated as a general category candidate in the two states. As a result, he could not be selected.

Bench had sought documentary proof

The Bench had asked Punjab and Haryana to come out with some document to show that Chandigarh was the capital of the two states. The query came during the hearing of an advocate’s petition seeking reservation in the two states by virtue of him being a city resident.