The Enforcement Directorate’s prolonged search operation at the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) has opened a fresh political front between the AAP government in Punjab and the BJP-led Centre, with the two sides offering sharply different accounts of what the agency’s action has uncovered.
The ED has alleged irregularities in land auctions, acquisitions, compensation and the grant of financial concessions to private developers. It has also claimed that senior AAP leaders Manish Sisodia and Satyendar Jain held “unofficial” meetings with GMADA officials where issues relating to land auctions, acquisitions and compensation were discussed.
The Aam Aadmi Party, however, has rejected the allegations as baseless and politically motivated. It has accused the Centre of using central investigative agencies to intimidate Punjab officials and disrupt the functioning of the Bhagwant Mann government.
The confrontation comes after the ED on September 22 launched searches and surveys at 26 locations across Delhi, Punjab, Chandigarh and Haryana in connection with a money-laundering investigation linked to Tirupati Infraprojects Pvt Ltd and associated companies. The GMADA headquarters in Mohali and offices linked to Punjab’s Housing and Urban Development Department were among the premises searched.
The agency’s action has since turned into a political controversy, with the ED’s allegations against senior AAP leaders adding another dimension to what began as an investigation into suspected financial irregularities involving real-estate transactions.
ED’s allegations
According to the ED, its investigation has uncovered evidence suggesting that GMADA officials held informal meetings with Satyendar Jain and his aide Amarender Jha outside the authority’s official premises.
The agency has claimed that senior officials allegedly carried files outside PUDA Bhawan for meetings at a house in Sector 39, Chandigarh, officially allotted to AAP leader and Punjab Water Supply and Sewerage Board chairman Sunny Singh Ahluwalia.
The ED alleges that the premises were being used by Jain and his OSD for meetings with GMADA officials on matters including fresh land auctions, acquisition and determination of compensation. It further claims that Manish Sisodia and Jain held regular unofficial meetings with officials dealing with land development and auctions.
The agency has also alleged that key decisions relating to auctions, land acquisition and compensation were informally influenced under Jain’s instructions.
Another allegation concerns the reserve prices of GMADA’s unsold land bank. The ED has claimed that reserve prices were allegedly reduced before auctions, potentially causing a loss of nearly Rs 10,000 crore to GMADA and the Punjab government while benefiting builders and politicians.
The agency has also flagged alleged irregularities in land acquisition awards and compensation under the 2013 law, besides alleged concessions granted to private developers.
Among the specific allegations is an alleged waiver of statutory dues in favour of Remigate, which the ED says resulted in a financial benefit of around Rs 57 crore. The agency has also flagged the re-allotment of cancelled plots.
The ED has further alleged that Amarender Jha, described by it as an OSD to Jain, informally operated from a room inside PUDA Bhawan despite having no official position there. According to the agency, he allegedly issued instructions and influenced decisions concerning GMADA.
Investigators have also said that phones seized from officials contained chats referring to alleged hawala payments involving relatives of Punjab government politicians. These are allegations made by the investigating agency and would have to be established through the legal process.
Where the probe began
The ED investigation stems from a CBI FIR concerning an alleged bank fraud involving Tirupati Infraprojects and its promoters.
The agency’s searches covered promoters, directors and associates of several companies, including Tirupati Infraprojects, Remigate Buildestates, MB Infrabuild, Mera Baba Reality Associates and Mera Baba Infrastructure.
The investigation has expanded into alleged transactions involving GMADA land and private developers.
Earlier reports from the raid said ED teams were examining alleged irregularities involving land acquisition, change-of-land-use permissions, property auctions and benefits allegedly extended to private realtors. Three floors of the GMADA office were reportedly sealed during the initial operation, while mobile phones of senior officials were seized.
The ED operation continued for more than 48 hours, with records seized as part of the money-laundering investigation.
AAP cries political vendetta
The AAP has presented an entirely different picture. The party has accused the BJP-led Centre of using central agencies to create an atmosphere of fear among Punjab officials and obstruct the state government’s welfare and development agenda.
AAP has particularly questioned the ED’s jurisdictional basis for searching GMADA, arguing that the CBI case cited by the agency relates to an alleged bank fraud involving Tirupati Infra Projects and does not constitute an FIR against GMADA itself.
The party has claimed that the ED used the case as a pretext to enter the Punjab government authority, seize records and disrupt its functioning for several days.
AAP has described the raid as “political harassment” and alleged that the Centre is attempting to create a political narrative around the material seized during the operation.
The party has also strongly denied reports that Sisodia and Jain were involved in GMADA’s official functioning. According to AAP, neither leader has any role in GMADA’s projects, day-to-day functioning or official decision-making. It has described claims of their meetings with GMADA officials as “false, baseless and politically motivated”.
The party has further alleged that the action is part of a broader pattern of central agencies being used against opposition-ruled states. The confrontation escalated when the Punjab government approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court, seeking judicial intervention over the ED operation and alleging that officials had been illegally detained.
The court appointed a warrant officer to inspect the premises and report on the situation. The officer later reported that the officials were not illegally detained or being pressured. The state subsequently withdrew its petition, with liberty to pursue other legal remedies.
The ED, meanwhile, maintained that GMADA offices remained accessible and that normal functioning continued. It also said officials were provided food, rest, medical facilities and access to their families. The contrasting accounts have added another layer to an already politically charged investigation.
AAP widens the political battle
AAP has sought to place the GMADA episode within the larger political relationship between Punjab and the Centre.
The party has referred to previous disputes over the farm laws, Chandigarh, Panjab University and Punjab’s role in the Bhakra Beas Management Board, arguing that the state has repeatedly opposed what it considers attempts by the Centre to encroach upon its rights.
AAP has alleged that the latest ED action is part of the same pattern and has accused the BJP-led government of attempting to exert political pressure through investigative agencies. The party has said the Bhagwant Mann government will examine the entire episode and take legal action if any unlawful conduct is established during the searches.
AAP workers have also staged a protest outside the GMADA office. The demonstrations added a political dimension to an investigation that is otherwise centred on alleged financial and administrative irregularities.
A battle of competing narratives
The GMADA controversy now rests on two sharply contrasting narratives. For the ED, the investigation points to alleged manipulation of land transactions, unofficial access to senior officials, questionable concessions to private developers and possible financial losses to the public exchequer.
For the AAP, the raid represents an attempt by the Centre to intimidate the Punjab government and create political pressure ahead of the state’s electoral battle. At the heart of the controversy, however, are the documents and transactions being examined by the investigating agency.
The ED’s allegation of a potential Rs 10,000-crore loss linked to the alleged reduction of reserve prices is particularly significant if established. So too are the alleged Rs 57-crore benefit arising from the waiver of statutory dues and the claims regarding irregular land acquisition compensation and re-allotment of cancelled plots.
But allegations are not convictions. The claims made by the ED will ultimately have to withstand investigation, scrutiny and, where applicable, judicial proceedings.
For the Punjab government, the political stakes are equally high. GMADA is one of the state’s key development authorities, particularly in the rapidly expanding Mohali region. Any proven manipulation of land auctions or concessions could raise questions about governance and public finances. Conversely, if the allegations against political leaders are not substantiated, the episode is likely to strengthen the AAP’s argument that central agencies are being used as instruments of political pressure.
For now, the GMADA office has become the latest battleground in the increasingly adversarial relationship between Punjab’s AAP government and the BJP-led Centre.
The investigation will determine whether the ED has uncovered a substantive financial and administrative wrongdoing—or whether, as AAP alleges, the raid will ultimately become another chapter in the political conflict between Chandigarh and Delhi.
For now, the documents seized from GMADA may tell a more consequential story than the political statements being traded outside its gates.
