Greater Bengaluru Authority doesn’t violate 74th amendment of Constitution: B. S. Patil

Amid growing opposition from sections of civil society over the Greater Bengaluru Governance (GBG) Bill, 2024, arguing it violates the 74th amendment of the Constitution of India, the Brand Bengaluru Committee (BBC), which submitted the first draft of the Bill to the government, has reassured that the Bill passed in both the Houses recently, aligns with the spirit and legality of the 74th amendment. 

Amid growing opposition from sections of civil society over the Greater Bengaluru Governance (GBG) Bill, 2024, arguing it violates the 74th amendment of the Constitution of India, the Brand Bengaluru Committee (BBC), which submitted the first draft of the Bill to the government, has reassured that the Bill passed in both the Houses recently, aligns with the spirit and legality of the 74th amendment. 

On Monday, a delegation from Bengaluru Town Hall (BTH), a collective of civic activists, met Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot urging him to withhold assent for the Bill. The delegation, led by actor-activist Prakash Belawadi, argued that the Bill violates the 74th Amendment by granting excessive control to the State government through the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA), which will be chaired by the Chief Minister.

However, B.S. Patil, chairman of BBC, defended the Bill in an interview with The Hindu, stating that the GBA’s role is primarily to coordinate with multiple corporations and parastatal agencies, ensuring an integrated development plan for the city. The GBA will not function in isolation. Instead, independent corporations, as prescribed in the 74th Amendment, will prepare their own plans and submit them to the GBA for integration, ensuring balanced infrastructure development, he said. 

Mr. Patil further emphasised that the Bill passed by both Houses incorporated most of the provisions in the draft Bill presented by the committee led by him. Explaining the GBA’s role, he noted that under the current governance model, parastatal bodies such as the BWSSB, BESCOM, and BMTC, are excluded from the planning process. The Bill proposes to bring these agencies under the GBA, allowing for a more integrated approach with inputs from all stakeholders, including the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA).

“The BDA, as the planning authority, has so far operated in isolation, without consulting other agencies. The last Master Plan in 2007 was drafted without their input. This Bill aims to eliminate such inconsistencies and ensure constitutional compliance,” Mr. Patil stated.

Addressing concerns over the GBA’s authority over corporations, he clarified: “The Bill also proposes the formation of the Bengaluru Metropolitan Planning Committee (BMPC), which will oversee the GBA. The BMPC will have final approval over GBA’s plans, which are compiled from various corporations. Additionally, Mayors can object to and suggest modifications to GBA’s proposals. Beyond this, the GBA has no authority to interfere in the functioning of individual corporations.”

Rejecting claims of violation of constitutional norms, Mr. Patil highlighted that the BMTC, under the 12th Schedule (Article 243W), does not currently fall within municipal jurisdiction — a gap the GBA seeks to address. “Through the GBA, the BMTC will finally have a voice in the city’s planning process,” he added.