AAP rejects ED allegations, questions timing and conduct of prolonged GMADA searches.
The Enforcement Directorate’s prolonged searches at the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) have opened a new political front for the Aam Aadmi Party in Punjab, with the 2027 Assembly elections now providing the backdrop to an increasingly bitter confrontation between the state government and the BJP-led Centre. The ED’s operation that went on for more than 50-hours has turned an investigation into alleged irregularities in GMADA’s land dealings into a wider political controversy involving the functioning of the Punjab government, senior AAP leaders and the Centre-state relationship. The agency has alleged irregularities in land acquisition, auctions, compensation and other transactions involving GMADA. It has also claimed that the reduction of reserve prices of certain unsold land parcels could have resulted in a potential loss of nearly Rs 10,000 crore to the authority and the Punjab government.
The figure has given the controversy a political life of its own. For the Opposition, it provides an opportunity to question the AAP government’s claims of transparency and clean governance. For AAP, it is an opportunity to portray the ED action as another instance of a central agency being used against an elected state government. AAP has rejected the allegations and questioned the timing and manner of the searches. The political significance of the episode, however, goes beyond the alleged land irregularities. The ED has also raised questions about meetings involving senior AAP leaders Manish Sisodia and Satyendar Jain and officials associated with GMADA. AAP has denied that the two leaders exercised any unofficial control over the authority. That allegation has brought back a politically sensitive question for the Punjab unit: the extent to which Delhi-based AAP leaders influence decision-making in the state.
A senior AAP leader, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the party was preparing to fight the controversy politically as well as legally. “We will answer every genuine question about the administration, but we will not allow an investigation to be converted into a political verdict. The Opposition wants the election campaign to begin with allegations rather than the government’s record, and we are prepared to challenge that narrative.” The strategy behind AAP’s response is evident. If the controversy remains focused on alleged irregularities in land transactions, the party could find itself answering uncomfortable questions about governance. But if it succeeds in making the episode primarily about the Centre’s alleged interference in Punjab, the political equation changes. AAP has experience with this political framing. The party has repeatedly argued that central investigative agencies are being used against opposition governments. The GMADA case gives it another opportunity to make that argument in Punjab.
Another AAP leader, who wished not to be named, said the party believed the ED action could ultimately strengthen its Centre-versus-Punjab argument. “The timing cannot be ignored. Punjab is approaching an election and suddenly a central agency is spending days inside a state government authority. Our response will be to take the issue to the people and ask whether the BJP wants to defeat AAP politically or through central agencies,” he explained. The allegations involve leaders from AAP’s Delhi establishment who continue to occupy important positions within the party’s national structure. That allows the Opposition to shift the conversation from the alleged land transactions to the question of who actually calls the shots in Punjab.
