Will splitting Bengaluru into seven municipal corporations help in governing it better?
The ruling Congress, which passed the contentious Greater Bengaluru Governance Bill, 2024, in the assembly on Monday, claimed that decentralisation would help in effective governance. However, the opposition BJP and JD(S) contend that the bill would fragment the city and hinder development due to “administrative confusion”, and lead to the city losing its Kannada identity as the different zones are dominated by non-Kannadigas. Most importantly, the revenue disparity would lead to uneven development of the corporations.
The bill that proposes splitting the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) into a maximum of seven smaller corporations, establishment of Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) for coordination with the chief minister as its ex-officio chairman and Bengaluru development minister as the vice-chairman, and extending the tenure of mayor and deputy mayor to 30 months, was tabled by Bengaluru Development Minister D.K. Shivakumar and passed in the assembly amid protests and walkout by the opposition members. However, the bill will become law only after it is passed in the legislative council and gets the Governor’s assent.
Leader of the opposition, R. Ashok, said the previous JD(S)-BJP government, in 2006, had created Greater Bengaluru by amalgamation of 110 surrounding villages for fear of Kannadigas becoming a minority in the city. “Now, can Kannada survive in Bengaluru East (IT-BT hub)? We might not even have a Kannadiga as the mayor. What if one of the corporations demands the Centre for a Union territory status? This will break Bengaluru. The future generation will not forgive us. Also, the disparity in revenue generation can lead to friction between corporations and the regions with less revenue will suffer,” said Ashok.
Shivakumar defended the move stating that one chief commissioner could not handle the entire city and also assured that corporations with lower revenue would be funded by the state government.
Calling the bill a “violation” of the 74th amendment of the Constitution that empowers the elected local bodies, Ashok said, “The CM cannot chair the regular meeting. Moreover, if one chief minister and a chief secretary can govern a state with seven crore population, why can’t one commissioner run the city.”
Union minister and JD(S) leader H.D. Kumaraswamy slammed the Congress government stating it excelled in the “divide and rule” policy.
“The Congress’ sole intention is to uproot the legacy of Nadaprabhu Kempegowda by dividing Bengaluru. This is not decentralisation of power or development, but decentralisation of loot! Looters like Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammad Ghori plundered India’s wealth. Now, Bengaluru has its own Ghazni and Ghori, searching for seven new ways to loot the city,” alleged Kumaraswamy.
Meanwhile, Bengaluru South MP Tejasvi Surya cautioned the government that the bill would “erode” the autonomy of Bengaluru’s elected representatives and pave the way for bureaucratic overreach.
“It violates the principles of the 74th Amendment to the Constitution, which empowers urban local bodies to legislate and execute laws on municipal matters. The KMC Act, 1976, and BBMP Act, 2020, had granted corporators authority over infrastructure, development, and civic amenities in consultation with ward committees. Under the GBG Bill, MLAs will have overriding control, opening the door to political interference and favouritism in local governance,” rued Surya.
Observing that Bengaluru already has a constitutionally mandated Metropolitan Planning Committee (MPC) responsible for regional coordination, infrastructure planning, and sustainable development, Surya alleged the GBA was “unconstitutional, parallel structure” sans any elected accountability.
Calling the proposal to split BBMP into multiple corporations, ranging from three to ten separate entities as "flawed", Surya expressed concern over the move further complicating Bengaluru’s financial structure, leading to project delays and a lack of fiscal clarity, besides duplication of expenses and wasted taxpayer money.
Citing the example of Delhi’s municipal corporation which was split into three bodies in 2012 to improve governance, only to be reunified in 2022 due to financial imbalances and administrative inefficiencies, Surya said, “Bengaluru should learn from this mistake, limiting the municipal zones to three or four instead of 10, ensuring financial autonomy while maintaining a unified oversight body for better inter-zone coordination. Hyderabad has successfully implemented urban planning through the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) and Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA).”