
Opinion Bengaluru's new local governance Act goes against the spirit of decentralisation
The Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024 (GBG Act), meant to replace the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 (BBMP Act, 2020), received the Karnataka Governor's assent on April 24. This comes in the aftermath of protest, controversy and walkouts staged against the Act, while it was passed in both the legislative assembly and the legislative council in Karnataka. The GBG Act provides for the creation of the Greater Bengaluru Authority for coordinating and supervising the development of the Greater Bengaluru area. Despite its claims to be 'futuristic', it does little to address Bengaluru's existing problems, which are rooted in lack of coordination among multiple agencies, ineffective decentralisation, and the lack of effective devolution of functions.
While the mayors of the municipal corporations within the Greater Bengaluru Area are designated as ex-officio members of the Greater Bengaluru Authority, the fact that the Chief Minister is the ex-officio chairperson is a cause for concern. As the GBG Act aims to improve the quality of life of all citizens of Bengaluru, the mayor — considered the city's first citizen — must be empowered to preside over the meetings of the Authority to ensure coordination, execution and administration of plans, schemes and major projects. These problems are compounded by the fact that the mayor's term is limited to 30 months — too short to provide stability in governance and to secure a long-term vision for the city.
The Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992, (74th CAA) provides for the establishment of urban local bodies(ULBs) as institutions of local self-government. The objective of the 74th CAA was to devolve key civic functions to ULBs, but in reality, functions such as planning, land use regulation, water supply and others continue to be provided by parastatals in Karnataka/Bengaluru. It is already problematic that these parastatals work directly under the state government and are not accountable to the ULBs. The 1st State Finance Commission, constituted in 1994 had, in fact, recommended that parastatal agencies such as the Bengaluru Development Authority should be brought under the purview of the ULBs. A reading of the composition of the GBA and its functions takes us back to an era that existed before the enactment of the 74th CAA. The Authority essentially brings the operation of the corporations under the control and jurisdiction of the state government, in direct contravention of the intent and purpose of the 74th CAA. The Act perpetuates continued encroachment on the functions and revenues of local governments by the apparently 'specialised agencies' of the state government, thereby weakening the autonomy of local governments and hindering their performance. The fact that the city does not have an elected council only exacerbates the problem, as a ULB without a council cannot be held accountable and responsible by the citizens.
The 74th CAA provides for the creation of ward committees, envisioning them as a bridge between the municipal government and citizens. The GBG Act aims to 'empower Ward Committees to become basic units of urban governance and facilitate community participation'. However, it is important to note that the Act falls short on two fronts when it comes to ward committees. First, although the Act states that decisions of the ward committee shall be made on the basis of a simple majority, by giving a veto power to the chairperson of the ward committee, it renders the idea of voting meaningless, as the chairperson still retains the ultimate decision-making power. Second, Section 103 of the Act clearly states that the recommendations of the ward committee are advisory in nature, thereby rendering the committee toothless. The Act has also done away with Area Sabhas, a body that actually institutionalised community participation and has been instrumental in empowering the residents to suggest development priorities for their areas.
Decentralisation is essential for effective governance, but it cannot be mere lip service. While the Act aims to restructure the BBMP into 'more manageable' corporations, the split will only create coordination problems between the smaller corporations. Some questions remain: What happens to the Bengaluru Metropolitan Land Transport Authority, which has a similar structure to the GBA? Will Bengaluru have to wait for many more years for a mayor and corporators? How long will it be before the GBG Act is struck down by the courts for being contrary to the 74th CAA? When will the city have a new master plan? While states continue to fight over the lack of effective decentralisation and federalism, perhaps it is also time for them to look inwards to address these very concerns to ensure that decision-making power in our democracy effectively trickles down and reaches the cities, towns and villages, as envisioned by our Constitution.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New Indian Express
9 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Only enumeration will be done for caste survey: Karnataka CM
CHIKKABALLAPUR: Following objections raised by a few people before the party high command, the caste survey will be conducted again but it will be only enumeration. The previous survey has been accepted in principle, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah said in Gouribidanur on Wednesday. He was speaking to the press during the inauguration of the KUSUM C Solar Scheme. The socio-economic caste census was conducted in 2015-16, and, as almost ten years have gone by, an enumeration survey will be conducted to include those who were left out, and will be completed within the stipulated period, he added. On including Tumakuru in Greater Bengaluru Authority, the chief minister said the cabinet will discuss in detail, but so far no decision has been taken. Replying to a question on the BJP demanding his resignation, the CM said the BJP is trying to do politics over the stampede, and asked whether the BJP had demanded any resignations when people had died in the Kumbh Mela stampede, or when a bridge collapsed in Gujarat. He added that a commission has been formed and it would submit its report within a month. The CM said the Congress government has sufficient funds to take up development works despite spending huge amounts on guarantee schemes. Last year, capital expenditure was Rs 52,000 crore, and this year it has been increased to Rs 83,000 crore, he said.


Time of India
21 hours ago
- Time of India
HC to hear afresh pleas against Maratha quota law from July 18
Mumbai: A special three-judge bench of Bombay high court will begin hearing afresh the challenges to state's latest iteration of the Maratha reservations on July 18. After the Supreme Court directive, HC, in May, constituted a new three-judge bench to hear the petitions, including those filed as public interest litigations, challenging the constitutional validity of the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2024, which provides 10% reservation for the Maratha community in govt jobs and admissions to educational institutions. The state opposed the request for consideration of any interim relief. The new full bench of Justices Ravindra V Ghuge, N J Jamadar, and Sandeep Marne on Wednesday recorded submissions of advocate general Birendra Saraf. There were detailed arguments heard in 2024 on interim relief, after which there was an interim arrangement that all further admissions to educational institutions and employment would be subject to court orders. Saraf submitted that this has operated for over a year and that the request for fresh consideration of interim relief was unwarranted. Pradeep Sancheti, senior counsel for a petitioner, sought an earlier date. Other lawyers also argued, saying students who took admission last year were also affected and hence, were seeking interim orders. In May, Supreme Court asked HC to expeditiously hear the pleas, including applications by students appearing for the undergraduate and postgraduate National Eligibility cum Entrance Test of 2025. The students filed pleas seeking interim relief, claiming that a delay in the disposal of pleas was impacting their right to equal consideration in the admission process. The petitions were not fully heard when the then HC Chief Justice was transferred in Jan as Delhi high court Chief Justice. Supreme Court said if Bombay HC cannot hear the matter for final disposal then it may consider interim relief. HC has now fixed a schedule to hear the matter at length on the main challenge. Last July, HC had observed that the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission, headed by former HC judge Justice S B Shukre, was a necessary party to be heard in one of the PILs filed before it.


Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
Bombay high court sets July hearing to reconsider challenges to Maratha reservation law
MUMBAI: A special three-judge bench of the Bombay High Court on Wednesday set July 18 as the date it would start hearing afresh the challenges to the state's latest iteration of the Maratha reservations. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now After the Supreme Court directive, the HC in May constituted a new three-judge bench to hear petitions, including those filed as public interest litigation (PIL), challenging the constitutional validity of the 2024 law providing Maratha reservation. The state opposed the request for consideration of any interim relief. The HC is faced with a clutch of petitions that assailed the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act, 2024 (SEBC), which gives 10 percent reservation to the Marathas in public employment. The new full bench of Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge, Justice N. J. Jamadar, and Justice Sandeep Marne recorded submissions of Advocate General Birendra Saraf. There were detailed arguments heard in 2024 on interim relief, after which there was an interim arrangement that all further admissions to educational institutions and employment would be subject to the orders of the court. He submitted that this has operated for over a year and that the request for fresh consideration of interim relief was unwarranted. Pradeep Sancheti, senior counsel for a petitioner challenging the constitutional validity of GR, sought an earlier date. Other lawyers also argued, saying students who took admission last year were also affected and hence were seeking interim orders. The top court last month asked the HC to expeditiously hear the pleas, including applications by students appearing for the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) undergraduate and postgraduate exams of 2025. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The students filed pleas seeking interim relief, claiming that a delay in the disposal of pleas was impacting their right to equal consideration in the admission process. The petitions in the matter were not fully heard when the former Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court was transferred in January this year as the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court. The High Court must consider the issue of interim relief without delay due to the wide-reaching impact of the case on students who are currently undergoing the admission process, the Supreme Court said. Last July, the High Court observed that the Maharashtra state backward class commission, headed by the former High Court Judge, Justice S. B. Shukre, was a necessary party to be heard in one of the PILs filed before it against the validity of the Maratha reservations.