He says some true things (like the socioeconomic structure that the British developed in Punjab post the conquest from the Sikhs was one in which a loyal landed elite was handed over domestic power, made up of the likes of Tiwanas, Qureishis etc.)
However I disagree with his and the mainstream Pakistani narrative that the events of 1857 constituted a war of independence. What loyalty did Punjabi's owe to the ayash sultans sitting in Delhi. Post Aurangzeb, Punjab was used by the Mughals as a province from which to grab resources. Whereas in the past Punjab had given the Mughal Empire men such as Shahbaz Khan, Mohammed Saleh Kamboh etc, post Aurangzeb Punjab loses all importance for the Mughals and their world revolves around Delhi and Rajputana.
The arrival of the British however brought a tangible change to Punjab. Suddenly the worlds largest irrigation system was built which provided a decent living to hundreds of thousands of peasants (of course the British did this to feed their own empire but the side effect was turning Punjab into a green province). Unlike the ayash latter Mughals hence, the British brought tangible changes in the peoples lives.
Orya makes a derogatory comment about Sir Syed Ahmed Khan at the end labeling him a traitor as well, but no Khan was a realist. A scion of the Mughals court he had seen how pathetic the Mughal "emperor" and his court had become. One after the other native kingdoms were falling to the might of the European, and this was simply because the natives had rejected modern science and education. Orya mentions that the British built colleges and universities in Punjab. All the more reason why Punjabi's did not have a reason to rebel against the British initially. What did the Mughals ever build for Lahore post Aurangzeb? Syed Ahmed Khan simply had the foresight to ses what a pathetic state the Muslims were in, and wanted to ensure that once the British do take power (which was inevitable), the Muslims should be ready and willing to adopt western science and education. He was a man of foresight hence, not a traitor. Apparently some of our people still think like Mullahs from the mid 1800s, who also denounced Khan as a ghaddar.