The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled in favour of the Punjab government on Friday in its challenge to the Union government's withholding of travel authorisation, clearing the way for Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann to attend an international food trade exhibition in Paris.

After hearing arguments from both sides, Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya granted the petition brought by the state. The bench's written ruling, setting out its reasoning and the specific directions it had issued, had yet to be released.

The Punjab government approached the High Court after the Ministry of External Affairs withheld political clearance for a Mann-led delegation that had been due to travel to France between 15 and 21 October. Among those listed to travel with the group were Punjab Chief Secretary K.A.P. Sinha and Ravi Bhagat, who holds the post of Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister.

The planned trip centred on SIAL Paris 2026 — a global food trade fair running across five days from 17 to 21 October — and was aimed at opening overseas markets to Punjab's farm and food-processing output.

The central government's objections rested on security grounds — among them, the perceived threat posed by Khalistani groups — alongside a separate concern about the absence of any formal invitation extended by French authorities.

State officials in Punjab contended that no explanation accompanied the travel clearance refusal, and that the central government had applied a different standard to foreign visit requests originating from states under opposition control. The online e-Political Clearance portal returned a notation of "DENIED," according to state records.

Through its petition, the Punjab state government took the position that the Ministry of External Affairs had acted without proper justification in turning down the application, and that the state had been offered no opportunity to put forward its own account before the decision was made. In its legal submissions, the administration argued that the ruling lacked any stated reasoning, exceeded the bounds of lawful authority, and ran counter to the constitutional framework governing the division of powers between federal and state tiers.

Paperwork to begin the approval procedure had been filed by the state before any deadline arose. Three formal communications — two letters addressed to the MEA on 3 and 8 September, followed by an online application filed the next day — were submitted in pursuit of clearance for the planned visit. According to the petition, the necessary administrative approvals and cadre clearance were in place, and consultations with the Indian mission in France had taken place.

Lawyers for the state government argued that the planned trip fell under trade promotion activities and that the approval mechanism ought not to function as a tool for impeding the executive authority of a democratically elected administration. Chanchal Singla, holding both a Senior Advocate designation and the post of Additional Advocate General, appeared in court on behalf of the Punjab government.

In a sworn affidavit lodged on behalf of the Union government, Additional Solicitor General Satya Pal Jain opposed the petition, pointing to questions around the security arrangements that would be required for the proposed visit. According to the government's submission, providing adequate security coverage across a gathering of that scale posed logistical challenges that could not be fully addressed within the available timeframe.

The affidavit also contained details regarding a reported threat to Mann's safety, said to originate from Khalistani networks operating both within India and beyond its borders. The central government pointed to correspondence originating from Punjab's own administration that had raised concerns about a threat to the Chief Minister, with Gurpatwant Singh Pannun of Sikhs for Justice named within that correspondence. Authorities argued that keeping Mann safe was the driving reason behind the decision, pointing to what they described as a genuine threat to his life.

Questions were also raised in the Union government's submission about how, without a formal invitation from the French government, the Indian embassy would have been positioned to arrange the visit and handle the attendant diplomatic formalities.

Punjab's administration put forward the position that the trip was aimed at furthering the province's trade and economic interests. A display space at the India Pavilion run by the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) had been assigned to the Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited (MARKFED), the cooperative body that serves as Punjab's apex marketing federation for agricultural goods. Oversight of APEDA falls within the portfolio of the Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry.

The state cited that funding allocation as part of its argument that the proposed involvement sat within an established trade-promotion structure. According to the Punjab delegation's stated plans, farm produce and processed food items were to be presented to international buyers, with the broader aim of widening the province's export footprint. The petition stated that full responsibility for covering the expenses of the visit rested with MARKFED.

Lawyers for the state further argued that security logistics for the visit could be worked out in conjunction with French officials, pointing to prior overseas travel by Mann — spanning Japan, South Korea, and Australia — each of which had received the necessary political clearance. The petition also contended that travel requests submitted by Chief Ministers heading opposition-run states were being assessed under a different set of criteria than those applied elsewhere.