2023 · GS Paper 2 · Q3 · 10 marks

The states in India seem reluctant to empower urban local bodies both functionally as well as financially. Comment.

In short

States have largely created elected urban local bodies in form while retaining functions, staff and taxes, keeping municipalities dependent on them. Municipal own-source revenue was only 0.38% of GDP in 2021-22, as states control property tax rates and parastatals run key services.

Model answer

Ghissu Editorial · Verified 4 Oct 2026

Introduction
Article 243W leaves it to states to endow municipalities with the eighteen Twelfth Schedule functions. Three decades after the 74th Amendment, most states created elected councils but kept real power, so the observation is largely accurate.
Functional Reluctance of States
•

Parastatals

Water, planning and transport sit with state boards and development authorities, such as Bengaluru's water supply board, leaving corporations to maintain what others build.

•

Weak mayors

Mayors in many states are indirectly elected with short terms, Delhi's for one year, while the state-appointed commissioner holds executive power.

•

Borrowed staff

Recruitment, transfers and supersession remain state decisions, so councils cannot build capacity.

•

Planning withheld

Metropolitan Planning Committees under Article 243ZE exist in only a few cities, so state authorities still draft master plans.

Financial Reluctance of States
•

Thin own revenue

Municipal own-source revenue was only 0.38% of GDP in 2021-22 (Janaagraha), because states fix property tax rates and rarely revise them.

•

Taxes taken away

The 101st Amendment (2016) folded octroi and entry tax into GST without a municipal share.

•

Neglected SFCs

The IIPA study for the 16th Finance Commission (2025) found that Punjab, for its second SFC, was the only state to table an Action Taken Report within six months.

•

The exceptions

Kerala devolved funds and staff, and Ahmedabad issued India's first municipal bond without a state guarantee in 1998, showing what empowered cities achieve.

Conclusion
States accept urban democracy in form but resist it in substance. Activity mapping, directly elected mayors, a GST share and property tax reform can make cities the engines of Viksit Bharat 2047.

This model answer is indicative and the model can make mistakes; please verify key facts independently.

Hand-drawn diagram: Urban Local Bodies: Form and Substance. Urban Local Bodies: Form and Substance. Diagram (iceberg): Urban Local Bodies: Form and Substance; Elected councils; Twelfth Schedule; Mayors; State-run parastatals; Commissioner holds power; State-controlled staff; Unheeded SFCs
Diagram: Urban Local Bodies: Form and Substance

Practise this question

  1. 1Get the answer sheet

    Sized for this question.

  2. 2Write your answer

    Timed, by hand.

  3. 3Get it marked

    Your score and what to fix.

Share this questionWhatsAppTelegramXLinkedIn

This chapter in the exam

Devolution — Municipalities2 questions

Asked in 2 of 14 sittings since 2013

2013
–
2014
–
2015
–
2016
–
2017
–
2018
–
2019
–
2020
–
2021
–
2022
–
2023
1
2024
1
2025
–
2026
–

Question from the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) Examination 2023 paper. Answer written by Ghissu's engine and checked against our editorial standards. Found an error? Tell us and we correct it within 48 hours.

Ghissu

OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·