Protests stall Mohali’s anti-encroachment drive again
Mohali mayor Amarjit Singh Sidhu countered the allegation, claiming Tuesday’s action was politically motivated and that his ward had been deliberately targeted
The ongoing anti-encroachment drive being carried out by the Mohali municipal corporation (MC) and the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) is facing increasing political and public resistance, with the latest action in Phase 7 on Tuesday being temporarily halted following protests by residents.
The drive, conducted in compliance with a 2022 Punjab and Haryana high court order, has met opposition across several sectors since it began earlier this month. Officials said the intensified campaign, planned from December 1 to 15, aims to cover the entire city and primarily targets unauthorised extensions such as grilles, corner fencing, and other structures erected on public land. However, the execution has been repeatedly disrupted.
The drive commenced in Phase 4 on December 1 but was halted after residents approached the court. It resumed in Phase 11 on December 6, where it again faced stiff resistance. On Tuesday, officials reached Phase 7 and removed illegal structures despite opposition, triggering fresh confrontations.
Residents accused authorities of ignoring repeated requests for more time and claimed they were taken by surprise despite assurances of voluntary compliance. “If uniform enforcement was the objective, the MC should have started from Phase 1,” they said.
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Kulwant Singh visited Phase 11 on Tuesday amid protests and said the orders were issued under the high court directions, not by the AAP or Punjab government. He accused certain opposition representatives, apparently referring to the mayor, of visiting protest sites to gain political mileage and misleading residents about the court’s orders.
Mohali mayor Amarjit Singh Sidhu countered the allegation, claiming Tuesday’s action was politically motivated and that his ward had been deliberately targeted. He said the drive appeared selective rather than uniform, pointing to differences in enforcement across Phases 7, 10, and 11, and asserted that demolishing people’s homes should not be used for political gains.
