Who should plan for the city?

by March 6, 2018 Governance
Planning cities is a task that requires in-depth knowledge of practical issues. Who has to do it? Is it an administrative body? Or is it a committee of elected people?

While the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) recently published the Draft Revised Master Plan for Bengaluru, civil society groups from the city have filed Writ Petitions in the High Court of Karnataka challenging the constitutional authority of the BDA to prepare the Master Plan. They have argued that it is the constitutionally mandated Metropolitan Planning Committee (MPC) that should prepare the Master Plan and not the BDA.

As the High Court of Karnataka adjudicates whether the BDA or the MPC should have the power to make the Master Plan, this CLPR briefing note authored by Sudhir Krishnaswamy and Mathew Idiculla examines the constitutional and legal framework for urban planning and clarifies the roles of the MPC, the BDA and the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) in planning for Bengaluru.

The Briefing Note clarifies that as per the 74th Constitutional Amendment, it is the elected urban local body like the BBMP which is primarily vested with the task of urban planning while the MPC is tasked with the responsibility to prepare a metropolitan-level development plan which integrates the plans prepared by the various elected local bodies in the metropolitan area.

 [embeddoc url=”http://clpr.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/CLPR-Briefing-Note-Who-Should-Plan-for-the-City.pdf” download=”all”]

This was a note sent to Citizen Matters by Mathew Idiculla, one of the authors. This report can also be found online here.
Sections:

About News Desk

The News Desk at Citizen Matters puts out Press Releases, notifications and curated information useful to the urban reader.
Read more by News Desk

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Similar Story

Citizens step up: How South Bengaluru volunteers solved SIR hurdles

by August 20, 2026 Governance
From tracking down 2002 voter details to coordinating with overworked BLOs, community members in Bengaluru are stepping in where the system falls short.

While the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process aims to clean up electoral rolls, the enumeration forms created innumerable hurdles for existing voters. From tracking down elusive 2002 voter details to coordinating with overworked Booth Level Officers (BLOs), citizens across Bengaluru faced a daunting task completing the registration process. Recognising these challenges in their own neighbourhoods, volunteers led by three active citizens—Poongothai, Aparna Shamanth, and Venkatachalam Subramaniam—took it upon themselves to help people in their community and beyond.   Mapping the confusion in Gottigere Poongothai lives in Gottigere, which falls under the Bengaluru South assembly constituency. Her community consists of around 400…

Continue reading

Similar Story

Bidadi GBIT project: Land acquisition process and compensation raises critical questions

by and August 18, 2026 Governance
As the goverment focuses on land acquisition for the 7,481-acre project, are farmers' rights and crucial social impact checks being compromised?

The Greater Bengaluru Integrated Township (GBIT) in Bidadi, first notified in March 2025, received its final notification in June 2026 under the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act (KUDA Act), 1987. The project is branded as India's first and largest AI City, featuring an AI-integrated township. The project will be implemented by the Greater Bengaluru Development Authority (GBDA) under the same act. Three villages, Kempainapalya, Vaderahalli, and Mandalahalli are notified in the Gazette under Section 19(1) of the KUDA Act for the implementation of a development scheme, deemed as public purpose. The development scheme is spread over a total of 7,481…

Continue reading