Urban chaos: Too many captains, no clear command

As multiple agencies govern India’s cities in silos, planning and accountability become the casualty.

As the Indian Premier League (IPL) season advances, we hear a lot about captaincy and its significance in match results. This analogy holds a lesson for our cities, where every day is matchday – where we, the people, face off against potholes, jammed roads, dirty air and water, harsh climate, and unaffordable housing. Who is the captain leading us?

According to the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 (74th CAA), the captaincy lies with city governments or Urban Local Governments (ULGs) elected by the people. In practice, however, our cities don’t have just one captain. Instead, we have multiple captains, controlling different aspects of the city, often implementing different strategies, but playing on the same field. The result? Chaos, lack of accountability, and urban challenges remain unresolved. With ULGs in many states heading into elections this year, voters must understand this problem better.

According to the 74th CAA, ULGs must have complete power over 18 core city functions. These range from simple street lighting to complex functions like economic and social development, urban planning, land-use regulation, and ecological protection. But, as of 2026, this is far from true. Instead, these powers are split across 20-39 unique agencies performing core city functions. These include ULGs, parastatal authorities (like corporations established for specific functions such as electricity, water supply, or metro-rail), state government departments, Special Economic Zones (SEZ) authorities, cantonment boards, and other agencies.

Each agency performs a specialised role, but in the process, fragments the city into smaller pockets of control. The jurisdictions of these agencies often overlap, and they tend to operate in silos. Take the example of a simple road in Bengaluru. The Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) is responsible for building and maintaining local roads and civic services, but the water supply and sewerage lines that run beneath the roads are handled by the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB), while electricity lines are managed by BESCOM.

At the same time, planning decisions are determined by agencies like the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA). As a result, even one stretch of road is simultaneously governed by many independent authorities. Effectively, the city is run not by one institution but by every agency that has jurisdiction over it.

Apart from overlapping jurisdiction, this fragmented governance creates a fundamental problem: the absence of a single point of accountability. Agencies operate based on their own mandates, with little coordination. Each manages a part of the system, but no one is responsible for the whole. The larger goal of creating a liveable city is lost in the process.

For example, congestion, a hallmark in most of our cities, is an outcome of multiple decisions – how land is planned for infrastructure and utilities, where jobs and housing are located, how public transport is designed and integrated, whether streets are safe and accessible for pedestrians, and how traffic is managed.

In Bengaluru, land-use plans that decide where people live and work are prepared by the BDA and the Directorate of Town and Country Planning. Public buses are operated by the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC), while metro systems are developed and run by Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited (BMRCL). Roads and street infrastructure were managed by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), traffic is handled by the Bengaluru Traffic Police and permits for auto-rickshaws and cabs are issued by the state transport department.

When different agencies plan and operate pieces of the system in isolation, the city grows without alignment between where people live, where they work, and how they travel. Commercial and business centres – where most jobs are – come up in areas that are not well served by public transport. Roads are widened without improving bus systems or ensuring pedestrian access for seamless connectivity to surrounding neighbourhoods. The result is predictable: more reliance on private vehicles, longer travel distances, and worsening congestion.

No public accountability

In principle, ULGs should have the biggest say in how to spend money on the city, as they are directly elected and closest to citizens. However, Janaagraha’s analysis of public spending in Bengaluru shows that BBMP, the erstwhile city government, only accounted for 20% of all public spending. Parastatals and state departments controlled and spent the remaining 80%, and they do not answer to the BBMP or to
the citizens. These authorities offer limited transparency – disclosing, on average, only 34% of relevant financial information.

Fragmented ownership is a key reason our cities remain stuck with poor liveability. There is a systemic disconnect between responsibility and authority: ULGs are held responsible for service delivery without having control over key functions, while parastatals exercise significant power without accountability. Addressing this is essential for meaningful urban reform; the 74th CAA already shows us the way.

ULGs must be given complete authority and autonomy over city functions. Accountability and transparency should be strengthened, and all agencies performing urban functions must be answerable to the ULG. The Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) can incentivise state governments to give ULGs the fiscal and organisational capacity they need to fulfil this role. MoHUA can also establish a clear timeframe and roadmap for transitioning powers to ULGs.

If our cities are to win against mounting challenges, they need a capable captain, clearly defined roles for their players, and frictionless coordination between them. Without that, we might see brilliant individual performances, but they will not translate into sustained improvements to our daily lives.

(The writers are senior associates, Urban Policy, at Janaagraha)

(Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.)