dismantles an operating public market, unsettles small traders
In Mohali, a fruit and vegetable market that had barely found its footing became the subject of a governance dispute that asks an older question: when the state moves land from one hand to another, who accounts for the people already standing on it? Punjab's Leader of Opposition Partap Singh Bajwa has appealed to Governor Gulab Chand Kataria to halt the transfer of twelve operational acres from the Mandi Board to PUDA for auction, arguing that a functioning market and the livelihoods rooted within it cannot be reduced to a line item in a land optimisation scheme. The episode sits at the familiar intersection of administrative efficiency and human consequence, where the ledger balances on paper while lives remain unsettled.
- A market that opened in July 2025 with fifteen allotted shops and active traders now faces erasure just two months after its inauguration, undone by a September 25 board resolution.
- Small traders who signed agreements and invested in good faith are confronting potential displacement, with the state's offer of a refund plus six percent interest doing little to cover real business losses.
- Bajwa's letter to the Governor reframes what the government calls an inter-departmental land optimisation as the dismantling of a public market and the erosion of genuine auction value in favour of an arbitrary collector's rate.
- The opposition demands a freeze on all title transfers and possession changes, insisting that no trader be compelled to accept cancellation without a credible rehabilitation plan and fair compensation first.
- The market continues to operate under a cloud of uncertainty, its traders aware that a boardroom decision made without their knowledge now governs their commercial future.
On September 25, the Punjab Mandi Board voted to transfer twelve acres of a newly built fruit and vegetable market in Mohali's Phase 11, Sector 65, to the Punjab Urban Development Authority, which would auction the land under the state's Optimum Utilisation of Vacant Government Lands Scheme. The transaction was projected to yield over 700 crore rupees at collector's rates, and displaced shop owners were to be refunded with six percent interest. On paper, it read as a clean administrative adjustment.
The problem was that the market was neither vacant nor dormant. Just two months earlier, in July 2025, fifteen double-storeyed shops had been allotted and handed over to traders who had signed agreements, committed their capital, and begun doing business. They had entered the market believing they were building something durable.
Partap Singh Bajwa, Punjab's Leader of Opposition, wrote to Governor Gulab Chand Kataria urging him to intervene. His letter argued that beneath the bureaucratic framing lay a more troubling reality: a functioning public market was being dismantled, small traders were being destabilised without adequate remedy, and the use of an administrative rate rather than genuine market pricing meant the public exchequer would itself absorb a loss in real value.
Bajwa's demands were precise — no change to the market's title, possession, or operations, and no trader to be pushed toward cancellation or handed a refund cheque without first receiving a genuine rehabilitation plan and compensation reflecting actual losses, not merely the face value of their original investment.
For now, the market remains open, but the traders within it work under uncertainty. Whether the Governor acts on the appeal will determine whether the machinery of the September 25 decision continues forward — or pauses long enough to reckon with the people in its path.
On September 25, the Punjab Mandi Board made a decision that would upend a market that had only just begun to function. The board voted to hand over twelve acres of a newly built fruit and vegetable market in Mohali—specifically in Phase 11, Sector 65—to PUDA, the Punjab Urban Development Authority, which would then auction the land off. The transaction was framed as part of a larger government initiative called the Optimum Utilisation of Vacant Government Lands Scheme. On paper, it looked like a straightforward bureaucratic maneuver: the state would receive over 700 crore rupees at collector's rates, and recent shop owners would be refunded with six percent interest attached.
But the market was not vacant. It was working. In July 2025, just two months before the board's decision, fifteen double-storeyed shops had been allotted and handed over to traders. People had invested their money, signed agreements, and begun conducting business. They had come to the market in good faith, believing they had secured a place to operate for years to come.
Partap Singh Bajwa, the Leader of Opposition in Punjab, saw what was happening and wrote directly to Governor Gulab Chand Kataria asking him to intervene and stop the transfer. In his letter, Bajwa reframed the transaction in terms that cut past the administrative language. Yes, it could be described as an inter-governmental adjustment, he wrote. But what it actually did was dismantle a functioning public market, destabilize the small traders who had invested in it, and replace genuine market pricing with an arbitrary administrative rate—which meant the public exchequer would lose real value in the process.
The traders caught in this situation faced a particular kind of vulnerability. They had not simply bought property; they had made a commitment based on what they believed was a stable arrangement. Now, without warning, that arrangement was being unmade. The board's plan to refund them with interest did not account for the actual losses they would suffer—the business they would lose, the time and resources already spent, the disruption to their livelihoods.
Bajwa's request to the Governor was specific. He asked that the market's title, possession, and operations remain unchanged. He demanded that no trader be forced to cancel their agreement or accept a refund check without first being offered a genuine rehabilitation plan and compensation that reflected their real losses, not just the nominal value of their initial investment. The letter was, in essence, a plea to pause the machinery of government long enough to consider the people it would grind through.
What happens next depends on whether the Governor acts on the request. The market continues to operate for now, but the traders working there are aware that their future is uncertain. The decision made in a boardroom on September 25 has cast a shadow over a place that was supposed to be a permanent fixture in Mohali's commercial landscape.
Citas Notables
On the surface, this may be framed as an inter-governmental adjustment. In substance, it dismantles an operating public market, unsettles small traders who invested in good faith and erodes value to the public exchequer by substituting a true market discovery with an administrative rate.— Partap Singh Bajwa, Leader of Opposition, in his letter to the Governor
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why would the Mandi Board want to transfer a functioning market? What's the actual incentive here?
The money. Seven hundred crore rupees is substantial. And there's a larger government scheme encouraging the transfer of unused land. The board probably sees it as an opportunity to unlock value that's sitting idle—except it's not idle. People are trading there.
But the traders were told this was permanent, weren't they?
That's the core of it. They invested based on what they understood to be a stable arrangement. The board allotted the shops in July. By September, the decision to transfer had already been made. The traders had no warning.
The refund with interest—why isn't that enough?
Because it doesn't account for what they actually lose. A trader doesn't just lose the shop. They lose the business they've built, the relationships with suppliers and customers, the time they've invested. Six percent interest on the initial cost doesn't touch any of that.
So Bajwa is asking the Governor to essentially overrule the Mandi Board?
He's asking for a pause. For the Governor to insist that before anyone is displaced, there has to be a real plan for where they go and how they're made whole. It's a question of whether the government moves money around or whether it considers the people caught in the middle.
What's the likelihood the Governor actually intervenes?
That depends on political will and how much pressure Bajwa can generate. The Mandi Board has already decided. Reversing that takes someone with authority willing to say no.