-
CENTRES
Progammes & Centres
Location
New York’s mayor wields executive authority over a city-state; Mumbai’s mayor presides ceremonially, revealing how India’s cities remain structurally disempowered
The worldwide coverage of the recent mayoral election in New York City (NYC) has naturally led to comparisons of the NYC mayor with those in the top Indian megacities, such as Mumbai, Delhi, and Bengaluru. In this regard, it would be best to pick the Indian city of Mumbai for comparison. It is also a city that will soon go into elections.
Mumbai’s local governing entity, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), performs a comprehensive set of functions, larger than those of any other municipal body in India. Governing a geographical area of 478 km2, its finances are more robust than those of most other Indian cities. The 2011 Census pegged its population at 12.44 million. Given its last decadal growth rate, its current 2025 demography is expected to be around 14 million. NYC has a larger area of 790 km2, but a much smaller population of around 8.5 million (2025). Both Delhi and Bengaluru, on the other hand, are split into multiple corporations that locally govern smaller geographical areas.
However, any comparison between Mumbai and NYC in terms of the position and powers that the two mayors enjoy is as preposterous as a square circle. Before assessing the two mayors, it is necessary to examine the status of the cities themselves in the context of the states in which they are located. NYC is situated within the state of New York and functions under the New York State Constitution and other state statutes. The New York State Constitution affords the state legislature the power to create and regulate local governments. The most significant state statute for NYC is the General Municipal Law of New York State, which applies to all municipal bodies within the state.
Any comparison between Mumbai and NYC in terms of the position and powers that the two mayors enjoy is as preposterous as a square circle.
Additionally, NYC has the New York City Charter, enacted under the authority of the State Constitution. It postulates the structure and powers of the city agencies. The BMC, on the other hand, functions under the state of Maharashtra and its urban statutes, namely the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, and the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966.
The very first chapter of the New York City Charter is devoted to the mayor. It states that the mayor will serve as the city’s chief executive officer. He will serve a four-year term and receive an annual salary of US$258,750. He shall have a monopoly over all appointments and dismissals, including those of administrators, departments, commissioners, and other officers not popularly elected. He shall appoint one or more deputy mayors, have the powers of a magistrate, and the powers of a finance board. Section 8, Chapter 1 of the Charter leaves no doubt or scope for interpretation. It states, “The mayor shall exercise all the powers vested in the city.” However, the governor of the state is empowered to remove the mayor from office upon charges being served upon him, after an opportunity to be heard in defence. Pending a final decision, the governor could suspend him. It is noteworthy to remember that the governor, in the entire history of the city, has never exercised these powers.
Turning our attention to Mumbai, Section 37 of the BMC Act provides that the Corporation shall, at its first meeting after the general elections, elect one of its councillors as the mayor. Since the mayor is essentially a councillor, it is clear that the Mumbai mayor, unlike the NYC mayor, is indirectly elected. The City Corporation has 227 elected councillors. The mayor’s tenure is 2.5 years. Section 36 stipulates that it is the mayor’s responsibility to convene the monthly meeting of the Corporation and that they may be removed from office by the state government if they fail to convene two consecutive meetings of the Corporation as statutorily provided. Every such meeting will be presided over by the mayor. That sums up the powers of the Mumbai mayor. Undoubtedly, his role is ceremonial.
Turning our attention to Mumbai, Section 37 of the BMC Act provides that the Corporation shall, at its first meeting after the general elections, elect one of its councillors as the mayor.
Turning once again to NYC, its city council has very substantial powers. Section 21 of the Charter states that the council shall be the city’s legislative body. It shall comprise the public advocate and 51 council members. Section 28 of the Charter stipulates that the City Council may adopt local laws it deems appropriate, provided they are “not inconsistent with the provisions of this Charter or with the constitution or laws of the United States or this state, for the good rule and government of the city.” It shall have the powers to investigate and oversee, review city procurement policies, and advise and consent.
NYC has a vast number of functions and departments. Its most recognisable departments are the police department, headed by a police commissioner, and the departments of fire, transportation, environmental protection, buildings, housing preservation and development, and city planning. It has offices of criminal justice, crime victim survey, and street vendor enforcement. Its operations office is responsible for the effective delivery of services. There are offices of immigrant affairs, long-term planning and sustainability, offices of nightlife, food policy, cyber command, a centre for older workforce development, offices of data analytics, prevention of hate crimes, of minority and women-owned enterprises, and an emergency management department.
The other departments are those of education, parks and recreation, health and mental hygiene, and animal welfare. It also has other essential municipal departments, including buildings, sanitation, and citywide administrative services. Further, to serve equity goals, it has departments of the ageing, veterans’ services, cultural affairs, social services, domestic and gender-based violence, homeless services, children’s services, the department of corrections, and the office of diversity and inclusion. It also has departments of information technology and telecommunications, small business services, and finance.
The laws of the country recognise the pivotal role of megacities and treat them as mini-states, fully empowered to handle all their affairs and functions unhindered.
NYC has separate commissions on gender equity, art, city human rights, landmarks preservation, civic engagement, and sports. Notably, many functions performed in India at the state level have been statutorily delegated to the NYC, on the logic that they relate to city residents and the city should be responsible and accountable for them. The laws of the country recognise the pivotal role of megacities and treat them as mini-states, fully empowered to handle all their affairs and functions unhindered.
In India, Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) perform the functions listed in Schedule 12 of the Indian Constitution and those mentioned in state statutes. These are divided into obligatory duties and discretionary duties. Under the Indian Constitution, the ULBs get to perform services that are allocated to them by the state government.
In Mumbai, the obligatory duties include water and waste water management, solid waste management, sanitation, fire services, primary health, primary education, public vaccination, open spaces, public streets, bridges, subways, culverts and flyovers, street lighting, regulation of dangerous trades and abatement of all nuisances, places for disposal of the dead, public markets, slaughter houses, cattle pounds, registration of births and deaths, removal of obstructions and encroachments and anti-rabic treatment.
The number of discretionary functions is close to 50, some of which have become irrelevant, while others should be elevated to obligatory duties. New duties also need to be included, such as those related to climate change. A detailed review of statutory provisions is crucial in light of the current urban situation.
However, the most significant observation this article would like to record is that functions such as city transport, city housing, and city policing are state functions in India. This needs to be reviewed in terms of decentralisation, efficiency, and accountability. Similarly, the powers of the ULBs and the Indian mayor need a complete overhaul. Indian ULBs today are disempowered entities, seriously unfunded, and uncomfortably dysfunctional. India cannot urbanise sensibly with disabled cities.
Unlike NYC, India’s cities remain constrained by state control, limited mandates, and weak mayoral authority. As India rapidly urbanises, its cities need significant reforms by redefining the powers of the mayor and enhancing municipal autonomy. Otherwise, municipal elections will continue to remain dominated by party politics rather than citizen-centric governance.
Ramanath Jha is a Distinguished Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Dr. Ramanath Jha is Distinguished Fellow at Observer Research Foundation, Mumbai. He works on urbanisation — urban sustainability, urban governance and urban planning. Dr. Jha belongs ...
Read More +
PREV
