Urban Local Development - UPSC PDF Download

Introduction

• Urban Local Government refers to a governing institution in a legally defined town or city, characterized by a specific area and population. It represents the local community and has the autonomy to make decisions on various subjects as granted by the Constitution. These elected governing bodies in urban areas are also known as Urban Local Bodies (ULBs).
• To better understand the role and responsibilities of Urban Local Government, it is crucial to recognize its distinguishing features. The term "local" pertains to a particular area defined by its location, signifying a distinct region and the people residing there. Meanwhile, "government" implies its representative nature and the decision-making authority it holds on matters assigned to it under the Constitution.
• In summary, Urban Local Government is a self-governing entity in a designated urban area, responsible for discussing, regulating, and executing decisions on issues entrusted to it by the Constitution.

Significance of Urban Local Governments

The significance of Urban Local Governments (ULGs) lies in their ability to address and cater to the diverse needs, aspirations, and priorities of different regions and communities within a country. This three-tier system of government takes into consideration the variations in political values, economic development, societal values, and citizen participation across different states and cities.

• For instance, the context of Assam is different from Maharashtra or Gujarat, and the needs of people in Kerala may vary from those in Uttar Pradesh. Similarly, the willingness of people to pay taxes or user charges may differ between Delhi and Amritsar. Even within a state, larger towns with more extensive income sources may provide more services than smaller ones. Thus, local governments can effectively respond to the unique requirements of their inhabitants on matters that directly affect their daily lives.
• It should be noted that the level of services provided may differ from one town to another within a state and across the country. As urbanization in India continues to grow, the demand for good urban governance will also increase, necessitating the need for vibrant local governments.
• By the early 2030s, it is estimated that the majority of India's population will be living in urban areas. The United Nations Habitat highlights the critical need for India to strengthen its institutional structures at the local level and equip local governments and utilities with the necessary tools for successful governance. This would enable India to move towards sustainable and inclusive urbanization and position itself more effectively at the regional and global levels.
• The current institutional arrangement in India has its origins in the British rule, and understanding its evolution is essential for effectively addressing the challenges posed by rapid urbanization and diverse regional needs.

History of Urban Local Government in India

• Urban local government in India has a long history, dating back to ancient times when cities had various bodies responsible for managing local issues. In medieval times, during the Mughal Empire, officials called Kotwals were responsible for municipal functions, in addition to their magisterial, police, and fiscal duties. However, these officials were appointed by rulers, rather than being representative bodies of the people.
• The modern municipal system in India emerged during the British rule, when municipalities were established in the presidency towns of Madras, Calcutta, and Bombay. The first statutory enactment of municipal administration occurred in the Charter Act of 1793, granting the Governor-General of India the power to appoint Justices of the Peace to raise funds for scavenging, watching, and maintaining streets. Over time, the number of municipalities increased, and their functions expanded to include education, medical aid, and local public works.
• Lord Ripon, known as the father of local self-government in India, played a significant role in shaping the development of these institutions. He believed in the importance of local self-government as a means of popular and political education. Under his tenure, Acts were passed in 1883-84 that altered the constitution of municipal bodies and expanded their powers and functions. For the first time, some towns were allowed to have elected chairmen, and the municipalities became more representative of the people.
• The Government of India Act of 1935 further expanded the functions of local bodies, although their financial resources were reduced. A committee appointed in 1939 to review the working of municipal bodies found that their structure and constitution led to widespread dissatisfaction and inefficiency. World War II, however, hindered the progress of local self-government reform.
• After India gained independence in 1947, the country had the opportunity to introduce much-needed reforms in local governance. The abolition of nominations, the extension of franchise, and the granting of more powers to elected presidents in some provinces marked significant steps towards democratizing these institutions.

In summary, the evolution of urban local government in India has its roots in ancient and medieval times, but it was during the British rule that its modern form took shape. The post-independence period provided the opportunity to introduce reforms aimed at making local bodies more representative and efficient in addressing the needs of the urban population.

Urban Local Government in Post- Independence Era

• The Constitution of India had made detailed provisions for ensuring protection of democracy in Parliament and State Legislatures. However, the Constitution did not mention about Local Self-Government in urban areas as a clear-cut Constitutional obligation. While Village Panchayats had been included in the Directive Principles of State Policy, there was no specific reference to ULBs, except implicitly in Entry-5 of the State List, which placed the subject of Local Self-Government as a responsibility of the State. 
• So, the country continued to have the municipalities in the form that were inherited from the Britishers. Various states, which came into existence as a result of reorganisations enacted their laws for constituting municipalities. While structurally they were somewhat similar, there was vast difference in the scope of activities. First, we see the structures as they obtain even today.

Structure of the Urban Local Government in India

• The structure of Urban Local Government in India is determined by the respective States and Union Territories' statutes. There are two types of Acts - the Municipal Corporation Act and the Municipal Act - which outline the structure of Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) within each state. Generally, the ULB structure comprises a deliberative wing and an executive wing.
• The deliberative wing consists of an elected body and is headed by a Mayor or Chairman, depending on the specific case. This wing has the authority to advise, warn, criticize, and enforce decisions. On the other hand, the executive wing is led by a Commissioner, who is typically an officer of the State Government. In larger towns, the Commissioner can be an officer of the Indian Administrative Service or a Senior Provincial Service Officer, depending on the town's significance. In cities like Mumbai, the Commissioner is often one of the state's most senior civil servants.
• An example of this structure can be seen in the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC), which serves a population of nearly 5.6 million citizens across 104 wards. The SDMC is responsible for monitoring, upgrading, and developing civic amenities efficiently, with over 40 departments working to fulfill these responsibilities. The organizational chart of the SDMC illustrates the general framework of Urban Local Government in India, with the Mayor or Chairman leading the deliberative wing and the Commissioner heading the executive wing.

On the other hand, a smaller municipality like Nagar Palika Parishad, Gonda (Uttar Pradesh) to cater to about 125 thousand has limited number of departments and limited roles and functions as well, which are as follows:

• To ensure running and maintenance of civic services and facilities such as water supply and sewage system. 
• To issue license/permits for shops and business establishments. 
• To regulate opening/closing shops and markets. 
• To run public health services. 
• To maintain record of land and properties owned by it.

To discharge these functions, it has only seven departments: Public Works, Public Health, Water Supply, License, Town Planning, Street Light and Tax. Given the size of the cities across the country, there are bound to be variations. In fact, two prominent patterns have been observed.

Commissioner system

• In a commissioner system, the Mayor of the Municipal Corporation is typically chosen through an indirect election by the Councilors from among themselves. The elected Mayor serves for a term of one year, which can be renewed. However, the Mayor generally does not possess executive authority.
• In this system, the Councilors function through a committee, often called the Standing Committee, which acts as the executive, supervisory, financial, and personnel authority. This committee is made up of elected members.
• The Municipal Commissioner, who is appointed by the state government, serves as the head of the executive arm of the municipality. All executive powers are vested in this individual. Although the municipal corporation is responsible for creating policies for city governance, it is the Commissioner's responsibility to execute these policies. The duration of the Commissioner's tenure is determined by the state government, and their powers are derived from the statute and any delegations made by the corporation or the Standing Committee.

Mayor-in-Council system

• This model was introduced in West Bengal in 1984. This system is composed of a Mayor and a Council of elected members with individual portfolios. The Municipal Commissioner serves as the Principal Executive Officer, subject to the control and supervision of the Mayor as the Chief Executive Officer in this model.
• The city is grouped into wards to form a Ward Committee, consisting of the Councillors elected from the respective Wards. The Ward Committees are subject to general supervision of the Mayor-in-Council, and look after Ward level functions such as water supply, drainage, collection and removal of solid waste, disinfection and health services, housing services, lighting, repairs of certain categories of roads, maintenance of parks, and drains.
• There is normally a Directorate of the Municipal Administration, which looks after the matters concerning them, whereas the Corporations may deal with the State Government directly. Normally the Municipal Commissioner is a senior officer than Director Local Bodies, causing the placement of Commissioner directly under control of respective State Department.
• Maheshwari, (1971) evaluating the relationship between the ULBs and the state governments commented that the control of the State Government over Local Bodies degenerated into spasmodic, intermittent bouts and was often negative.

The Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992

• The Government stated that the objects and reasons behind the introduction of Seventy-third Amendment Bill, 1991 which was enacted as the Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992 was that in many States Local Bodies had become weak and ineffective on account of a variety of reasons, including the failure to hold regular elections, prolonged supersession and inadequate devolution of powers and functions. 
• As a result, Urban Local Bodies were not able to perform effectively as vibrant democratic units of self-government. The Act introduced political, functional and fiscal empowerment with reservation of seats to women and other weaker sections (243T), continuity in elected body city government (243U), creation of wards committees (243S), listing municipal functions with the Schedule XII in the constitution and creation of State Finance Commission (243Y). Among these Schedule XII and 243Y are discretionary whereas other are mentioned as “shall”. Accordingly, states have not devolved the functions as per Schedule XII in many cases, whereas others are implemented as expected.

• The 2nd Administrative Reforms Commission stated that no major changes in the structure and functioning of the ULBs have been observed till the 74th CAA, despite rapid urbanisation and consequential increase in the complexities of problems in urban areas. The powers and functions of these bodies varied from state to state as the subject “Local Government” fell into the state List. States had the power to define the role of the ULBs. 
• The 74th Amendment to the Constitution, bestowed upon these municipal bodies the Constitutional status. In terms of the Amendment, the responsibility for taking decisions regarding activities at the grassroots level, which affect people?s lives directly would rest upon the elected members of the people themselves. 
• The Amendment conforms to the principal of subsidiarity, which has been the determining factor for distribution of subjects between the Centre, States and the Local governments. The 2nd ARC recommended that the reform package for the ULBs must be informed by this principle. The constitutional status of the municipalities has ensured permanency to the entities of self-government with a specific role in planning for development and social justice for the local area.

Ward Committees

Article 243S provides for the constitution and composition of Wards Committees, etc.

• There shall be constituted Wards Committees, consisting of one or more Wards, within the territorial area of a Municipality having a population of three lakhs or more. 
• The Legislature of a State may, by law, make provision with respect to- 
  • the composition and the territorial area of a Wards Committee; 
  • the manner in which the seats in a Wards Committee shall be filled. 
• A member of a Municipality representing a ward within the territorial area of the Wards Committee shall be a member of that Committee. 
• Where a Wards Committee consists of- 
  • one ward, the member representing that ward in the Municipality; or 
  • two or more wards, one of the members representing such wards in the Municipality elected by the members of the Wards Committee, shall be the Chairperson of that Committee.
• Nothing in this article shall be deemed to prevent the Legislature of a State from making any provision for the Constitution of Committees in addition to the Wards Committees. The Ward committees have not been found to be very effective. Many political parties have now been talking about area sabhas, but there also not much has happened.

Role and Responsibilities of the Urban Local Government

• The Urban Local Government (ULG) in India has historically faced challenges due to inadequate constitutional provisions for local self-governance in urban areas. This led to instability in municipal governance and poor financial positions of Urban Local Bodies (ULBs). In response, the National Commission on Urbanisation was formed in 1985, which recommended measures to strengthen the financial position of ULBs such as developing mechanisms for devolution of funds, allocating more finance in Five-Year Plans, and strengthening the taxation base.
• Article 243W of the Indian Constitution outlines the powers, authority, and responsibilities of municipalities, and allows state legislatures to endow ULBs with the necessary powers and authority to function as institutions of self-government. This includes preparing plans for economic development and social justice, performing functions, and implementing schemes related to matters listed in the Twelfth Schedule.
• However, over time, specialized state government agencies began encroaching on the assigned functions and revenues of ULBs. States established Infrastructure Boards and development authorities which took over several responsibilities of municipalities, such as land-related issues and functions like water supply and sewerage. This weakened the authority of municipal bodies and contributed to their decline. These agencies often worked in isolation, leaving ULBs ill-equipped in terms of technical manpower and organizational ability to respond to emerging problems.
• Smaller municipalities were particularly affected, as they could not perform effectively and were often viewed as a threat or as power centers by politicians at the state and central levels. Additionally, the predominantly rural character of Indian society meant that urban areas received less attention from politicians and policymakers.

Responsibilities: Multiplicity of Agencies

• Multiple agencies are operating at city level, which quite often operate in the similar areas. These include a range of parastatal and para-municipal agencies. State Housing and/or  Slum Clearance Board, State level agencies for water and sanitation, State Urban Development Authority (SUDA) for poverty related actions with the support of District Urban  Development Authority, Public works Department (for water and roads) and State infrastructure Finance Corporations are operating as parastatal, whereas local level institutions for planning such as Development Authority or Improvement Trust, Local level Water and Sanitation Agency, etc. are operating as para-municipal agencies. 
• Functions listed in the schedule XII are not transferred to ULBs in toto in most of the cases. At times, these agencies have overlapping of functions and do similar work such as housing and infrastructure development done by Housing Boards, Development Authorities and Slum Clearance Board (Tamil Nadu).
• These agencies accordingly are not accountable to local population. There is a need, therefore, to devise suitable mechanism for better coordination at the local level. The ULB should be treated as mother institution at local level for vertical and horizontal coordination as they represent local population and popular support. In this regard, Schedule XII needs to be reviewed at the national level to determine local accountability and transfer of functions to the ULBs.

Urban Local Government: Issues and Challenges

Today the Local Government is expected to play many roles including (GoI, 2014):

• A Regulator, namely the administration of various acts and regulations; 
• A Provider, that involves providing urban services efficiently and equitably by managing its accounts effectively and efficiently; 
• An Agent that takes the schemes of higher-level Government to the people. This includes promotion of popular participation; 
• A Welfare Agency, which provides active assistance to higher level governments in the equitable distribution and delivery; 
• An Agent of Development, who strives for improvement in the quality of life through the augmentation of infrastructure.

Additionally, there is a greater awareness and recognition of the need and importance of vibrant Local Self-Government to provide various services to the inhabitants and as a mechanism for deepening democracy.There is also demand for rationalising the structure of these Local Bodies also. Bigger cities have fewer Councilors, per hundred thousand people.
Councilors (per hundred thousand people)

Area sabhas, which has been one of the much talked about reform may help in overcoming this challenge.
Mayoral reforms

• The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act (CAA) did not provide specific guidelines regarding the election, term length, or powers of Mayors within Urban Local Bodies (ULBs). Currently, several states in India, including Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu, have directly elected mayors. However, these mayors often hold only ceremonial positions with limited financial and political autonomy, and their terms of office are not standardized, with some serving as little as one year.
• Kumar (2019) suggests that directly elected mayors are expected to gain the support of bureaucrats by presenting themselves as representatives of the city's residents. Direct elections provide the necessary legitimacy for mayors to communicate, make demands, and ensure the best interests of the city are met. Another perspective argues that an empowered city executive can be achieved through an indirectly elected "Mayor-in-Council" (MIC) system, in which the mayor remains accountable to the council.
• In Madhya Pradesh, the state adopted a system of direct mayoral elections in 1998. However, the mayor was required to form an MIC comprised of elected councilors, which would provide aid and advice. The mayor would preside over MIC meetings and deliberations. In Himachal Pradesh, the state government amended the Municipal Corporation Act in 2010 to introduce direct elections for the positions of Mayor and Deputy-Mayor.

Strengthening the Urban Local Bodies

• The 2nd ARC observed that the Chairperson or Mayor in most Urban Local Governments in India holds a mainly ceremonial position. In many cases, the Commissioner, appointed by the State Government, holds most of the power. This often results in elected representatives taking on the role of the opposition, and when Municipal Commissioners are unyielding, gridlock situations can frequently occur (Jha, 2018).
• The 2nd ARC recommended that the roles of chairing the Municipal Council and exercising executive authority should be merged into a single role, either Chairman or Mayor. Meanwhile, the Commissioner should be responsible for performing the functions delegated to them. The ARC also suggested that Local Bodies should have the power to choose the Commissioner or Chief Officer since the elected Mayor or Chairperson is accountable to the electorate. The issue of tenure is crucial in this context.
• The tenure of the Mayor or Chairperson, currently one year in many states, should be standardized at five years across the country. This would ensure continuity and accountability. Similarly, the tenure of the Commissioner or Chief Executive Officers should also be fixed for a reasonably long period. A survey by Janagraha (2016) found that the average tenure of a Commissioner in India is just 11 months. These points require careful consideration in order to strengthen the Urban Local Bodies.

Role of the Urban Local Bodies in Flagship Programmes

• The Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission, along with the Smart Cities Mission and Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation, are crucial initiatives by the Indian government that highlight the central role Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) play in city planning, with a particular focus on citizen participation.
• However, according to Sama Khan et al (2018), the proposals indicate an over-dependence on consultants, insufficient involvement of citizens, and a standard set of interventions that are considered "smart solutions." Additionally, there seems to be a shift towards increased control of ULBs by state governments, raising concerns about the effectiveness of these flagship programs.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Urban Local Government plays a crucial role in addressing regional variations, catering to the specific needs and aspirations of local communities, and ensuring the efficient provision of services. With roots in ancient India and significant evolution during British rule, the Urban Local Government in India has faced various challenges in its structure and functioning. The Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992 aimed at strengthening these institutions, but further reforms are needed to address issues such as multiplicity of agencies, mayoral reforms, and better coordination. Ensuring the vibrancy and effectiveness of Urban Local Governments is essential for sustainable and inclusive urbanization in India, paving the way for improved quality of life for its citizens.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) of Urban Local Development

What is the role of Urban Local Governments in India?

Urban Local Governments play a crucial role in responding to the needs and aspirations of inhabitants at the local level, dealing with regional variations in political values, economic development, societal values, and citizen participation. They provide various services, such as water supply and sanitation, local public works, horticulture, and more, to improve the quality of life for citizens.

How did the Urban Local Government system evolve in India?

The Urban Local Government system in India has its roots in the British rule, with the establishment of Mayor's courts in Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay in 1726. The system underwent various changes and adaptations over time, with the formation of Municipalities and the enactment of the Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992, which granted Constitutional status to Municipalities.

What are the structures of Urban Local Governments in India?

Urban Local Governments in India have a deliberative wing and an executive wing. The deliberative wing consists of an elected body, headed by a Mayor or a Chairman, while the executive wing is headed by a Commissioner, usually an officer of the State Government. The structures can vary depending on the size of the city and the type of Act (Municipal Corporation Act or Municipal Act) governing them.

What was the impact of the Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992 on Urban Local Governments?

The Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992 granted Constitutional status to Municipalities, ensuring permanency and a specific role in planning for development and social justice for the local area. The Amendment aimed to make Urban Local Bodies more effective as institutions of self-government, with provisions for devolution of powers and responsibilities, reservation of seats for weaker sections, and continuity in elected city governments.

What are some of the current challenges faced by Urban Local Governments in India?

Urban Local Governments in India face challenges such as multiplicity of agencies leading to overlapping functions and lack of accountability, inadequate representation of citizens due to the varying structure of Local Bodies, and limited financial and political independence for Mayors. There is a need for rationalizing the structure of these Local Bodies, empowering Mayors through direct elections or Mayor-in-Council systems, and improving coordination among various agencies to address these challenges effectively.