“The states in India seem reluctant to empower urban local bodies both functionally as well as financially.” Comment. (2023, 10 Marks)

Paper	GS Paper 2
Word Limit	150 words
Syllabus Topic	Devolution of powers and finances up to local levels and challenges therein

Model Answer

The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 gave constitutional status to urban local bodies (ULBs). Yet, three decades later, most ULBs remain weak because states have not handed over enough powers and money.

Functional Reluctance

• Article 243W uses “may”, so transfer of the Twelfth Schedule‘s 18 functions is left to states.
• Parastatals like development authorities and water boards control key services.
• Metropolitan Planning Committees are often missing or inactive.
• Elections get delayed; mayors have short terms and little executive power.

Financial Reluctance

• State Finance Commissions (Article 243Y) are set up late, and their advice is often ignored.
• Property tax collection is low; GST subsumed local levies like entry tax.
• ULBs depend heavily on grants.

Positive Signs

• The 15th Finance Commission linked ULB grants to notifying floor rates of property tax.
• States like Kerala have devolved more functions and funds.

Conclusion

Real urban self-government needs the 3Fs: funds, functions and functionaries. Empowered cities are key to Viksit Bharat 2047.

Related PYQs

• Analyse the role of local bodies in providing good governance at local level and bring out the pros and cons merging the rural local bodies with the urban local bodies. (2024)
• ‘In the context of neo-liberal paradigm of development planning, multi-level planning is expected to make operations cost effective and remove many implementation blockages.’-Discuss. (2019)