Need to Change Cities’ Governance in India

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2 –Devolution of Powers and Finances up to Local Levels and Challenges There in.

Introduction

Indian cities face weak and unclear governance because elected local leaders have very little real authority. Most decisions are taken at the State level, while municipalities struggle with limited powers, poor finances, and overlapping institutions. Frequent political interference, weak civic awareness, and the incomplete impact of the 74th Amendment have further reduced local autonomy. These gaps show why India must rethink how its cities are governed to meet growing urban needs.

Need to Change Cities’ Governance in India

1. Mayors Have Limited Power: Mayors in large Indian cities have almost no authority. Most decisions are taken in the Chief Minister’s office, leaving municipal leaders with little control.
2. Overlapping Political Power: MLAs and MPs act as ex-officio members in municipalities. Their influence often overshadows corporators and Mayors. Local representatives cannot act independently because they remain subordinate to their party leaders in the Assembly or Parliament.
3. Cities Are Not Prioritised in Governance Structures: Urban areas have not received sustained attention, as India was seen mainly as a rural economy. Even though municipalities are historically old, their powers have not expanded, making strong reform necessary to meet the needs of rapidly growing cities.
4. Constitutional Amendments Did Not Strengthen Urban Local Bodies: The 73rd and 74th Amendments were expected to empower cities, but urban governance actually weakened due to political competition and the lack of public pressure.
5. 5. Limited Civic Awareness: There is a need for change because public apathy allows delays and weak institutions. Cities like Bengaluru have gone years without municipal elections, yet people did not protest. When citizens do not demand strong local governments, political actors have no reason to support reform.
6. 6. State-Controlled Agencies Overshadow Municipalities: Many essential services are handled by State agencies and parastatals, leaving municipalities with few functions and weak finances. This reduces the role of local elected representatives
7. Political Interference in Municipal Boundaries: Frequent mergers or divisions of city corporations are often used to postpone elections. Such actions prevent stable governance, creating another strong reason for reform.

Initiatives Taken to Change Cities’ Governance in India

1. Changing City Boundaries and Structures: Different States have attempted reorganising municipal bodies. Bengaluru has been split into five corporations, while many municipalities in Telangana are being merged into the GHMC. However, these steps often lack genuine governance goals.
2. Constitutionalisation Through the 74th Amendment: The 74th Amendment was expected to empower urban local governments by giving them constitutional status.
3. Attempts at Financial Devolution: In the past, cities like Hyderabad and Bombay transferred funds to ward offices. This allowed quicker decisions and more local accountability. These attempts showed that decentralisation can work when financial authority reaches the lowest level, but such practices weakened over time
4. Delimitation and Expansion Exercises: States have conducted periodic delimitation and expansion of municipal limits. While these exercises claim to represent population growth and administrative needs

Way forward

1. Build Strong Public Demand for Local Governance: Urban governance will improve only when citizens ask for stronger municipal bodies. People must see local governments as real governments and not as minor offices. Political leaders act when public pressure is clear, so active civic demand is essential to drive change.
2. Reduce Centralised Power: City leadership cannot function independently if the Chief Minister’s Office controls budgets, agencies, and key decisions. Reducing this concentration of power is crucial for giving space to Mayors and corporators to act on local issues without constant dependence on State-level approval.
3. Clear Division of Responsibilities: Many governance gaps arise from unclear roles. Multiple agencies control water, transport, waste, planning, and housing. A clear delineation of functions is important to avoid overlap. Each institution must have a defined area of work and a leader accountable for results.
4. Strengthening Local Finances: Cities need predictable financial flows. Ward offices must receive funds directly and be able to decide on local priorities. Without money and authority, decentralisation cannot succeed. Financial empowerment is the base for any governance reform.
5. Regulate Bureaucratic Dominance: Bureaucrats often become more powerful than elected bodies. They control key services and operate without local accountability. Reducing their dominance is essential for making Mayors visible and effective, and for ensuring that decisions respond to citizen needs, not bureaucratic priorities.
6. City-Specific Redesign : Every city faces unique political, administrative, and spatial challenges. Reform must be flexible and based on local needs.

Conclusion

Indian cities can function better only when local leaders gain real authority, finances flow predictably, parastatals are regulated, and citizens actively demand stronger urban governance. Reducing centralised control and redesigning city systems based on local realities are essential steps. Without these reforms, municipalities will remain weak and unable to deliver responsive urban services.

Question for practice:

Examine why India needs to change the governance structure of its cities and how these changes can make urban governance more responsive.

Source: The Hindu