What ails governance in India’s cities? Heart of problem lies in mayor’s office, says NITI Aayog
NITI Aayog released the report "Moving Towards Effective City Government — A Framework for Million-Plus Cities" on April 25, 2026, focused on India's 47 citi...
What Happened
- NITI Aayog released the report "Moving Towards Effective City Government — A Framework for Million-Plus Cities" on April 25, 2026, focused on India's 47 cities with populations exceeding one million.
- The report identifies the office of the Mayor as structurally weak — mayors are indirectly elected in most states, hold short and often interrupted terms, and lack executive authority over core municipal services.
- Key recommendations include: directly elected mayors with fixed five-year terms; unified mayoral control over core urban services (urban planning, water supply, transport); enhanced municipal finance including greater own-revenue capacity; and state legislative amendments to restructure urban governance.
- The report notes that despite the 74th Constitutional Amendment (1992) guaranteeing urban local bodies a genuine third tier of government with 18 devolved functions, city governments today exercise full control over only four of those functions in practice.
- India's million-plus cities account for approximately one-third of the country's urban population and about 60 percent of GDP — making effective city governance a critical economic priority.
Static Topic Bridges
The 74th Constitutional Amendment, 1992: Urban Local Bodies as the Third Tier
The Constitution (74th Amendment) Act, 1992 inserted Part IX-A (Articles 243P to 243ZG) into the Constitution, creating a constitutional framework for urban local bodies (ULBs) for the first time. Before this amendment, municipalities existed under state laws but had no constitutional recognition. The amendment mandates the establishment of three types of municipalities based on population and urban character, specifies their composition and election procedures, provides for reservation of seats, and requires states to devolve powers and functions to ULBs through legislation.
- Constitutional basis: Part IX-A, Articles 243P to 243ZG (inserted by Constitution (74th Amendment) Act, 1992, in force from June 1, 1993).
- Article 243Q: Three types of municipalities — Nagar Panchayat (transitional rural-to-urban areas), Municipal Council (smaller urban areas), Municipal Corporation (larger urban areas).
- Article 243P: Metropolitan area defined as a population exceeding 10 lakh (1 million).
- 12th Schedule (added by the 74th Amendment): Lists 18 functions that states may devolve to municipalities, including urban planning, regulation of land use, public health, water supply, slum improvement, urban forestry, and vital statistics.
- Article 243ZD: Constitution of Metropolitan Planning Committees for metropolitan areas.
- Article 243S: Reservation of seats — not less than one-third reserved for women; SC/ST reservation proportional to population.
- Article 243U: Duration of municipalities — five-year term; elections before expiry of term or within six months of dissolution.
Connection to this news: The NITI Aayog report exposes the gap between constitutional intent (18 devolved functions, genuine third tier) and operational reality (full control over only 4 functions) — and recommends structural reforms to close it.
The Gap Between Constitutional Mandate and Functional Reality
The 74th Amendment devolved the obligation to devolve — it required states to enact legislation transferring functions, funds, and functionaries (the "3Fs") to ULBs. However, because the Constitution does not compel states to actually transfer all 18 functions, most states have retained parastatals (state-level bodies like development authorities, water boards, and transport corporations) to control key urban services. This has created a fragmented urban governance structure where the elected local body — the municipal corporation — controls far less than citizens assume.
- The 3Fs framework: Functions (18 in the 12th Schedule), Funds (own revenue + devolution + grants), and Functionaries (staff under municipal control) — all three must be transferred for genuine decentralisation.
- State Finance Commissions (SFCs) — mandated under Article 243Y — are constituted every five years to recommend devolution of state taxes to ULBs; implementation has been weak in many states.
- Own revenue of Indian ULBs is among the lowest globally as a share of GDP — municipalities remain heavily dependent on state and central grants.
- Parallel bodies: Water supply boards, development authorities (e.g., BDA, DDA), transport corporations frequently operate independently of elected municipal councils, fragmenting accountability.
- NITI Aayog finding: City governments exercise full control over only 4 of the 18 constitutionally listed functions.
Connection to this news: The report diagnoses the structural cause of service delivery failure: mayors and municipal bodies are not empowered to control what they are held accountable for by citizens.
Directly Elected Mayors: International Practice and Indian Context
Most Indian states elect mayors indirectly — municipal councillors elect the mayor from among themselves, producing mayors with weak popular mandates, short effective tenures, and susceptibility to political instability. NITI Aayog recommends shifting to direct popular election of the mayor across all million-plus cities. A directly elected mayor with a fixed five-year term has a stronger mandate, a longer planning horizon, and clearer accountability to citizens — paralleling the executive mayor model used in cities like London, New York, and Seoul.
- Current Indian practice: In most states, mayors are elected indirectly by councillors; term often limited to 2.5 years; executive authority fragmented.
- Exceptions: Some states — including Madhya Pradesh and Uttarakhand — have experimented with direct election of mayors.
- NITI Aayog recommendation: Direct popular election of the Mayor (Chief Councillor) and Deputy Mayor; fixed five-year tenure coterminous with the municipal council term.
- Municipal Finance: NITI Aayog recommends enhanced own-revenue capacity — property tax rationalisation, user charges for services, and access to municipal bonds.
- Article 243W of the Constitution: Legislature of a state may endow municipalities with powers and authority to enable them to function as institutions of self-government — this is the enabling provision that states must use to legislate direct elections.
Connection to this news: Implementation of NITI Aayog's recommendations requires state-level legislative action (amending municipal acts); the Centre can recommend but not mandate — making this a Centre-State relations issue as much as an urban governance one.
Key Facts & Data
- 74th Constitutional Amendment: enacted 1992, in force from June 1, 1993.
- Part IX-A: Articles 243P to 243ZG — constitutional framework for urban local bodies.
- 12th Schedule: 18 functions listed for potential devolution to municipalities.
- NITI Aayog report: "Moving Towards Effective City Government — A Framework for Million-Plus Cities," released April 25, 2026.
- Scope: 47 cities with million-plus population.
- These 47 cities: approximately one-third of India's urban population; ~60 percent of GDP contribution.
- Current functional reality: ULBs exercise full control over only 4 of 18 constitutional functions.
- Metropolitan area threshold (Article 243P): population exceeding 10 lakh.
- State Finance Commissions: mandated under Article 243Y; constituted every 5 years.
- NITI Aayog key recommendation: directly elected mayors with fixed 5-year terms and unified executive authority over core services.