Planning the district and the metropolis: DPC and MPC

Detail

Why the Constitution needs planning bodies above the local bodies

• The problem: each panchayat and municipality plans only for its own area. Roads, water, drainage and pollution cross those borders, so someone has to plan for the whole area.
• The answer: the 74th Amendment (1992) set up two planning bodies in Part IXA (the Part of the Constitution on municipalities):
• District Planning Committee (DPC), Art. 243ZD. It plans for the whole district, both villages and towns.

• Metropolitan Planning Committee (MPC), Art. 243ZE. It plans for a big city region that covers many municipalities and panchayats.

• Draft plan: neither committee makes the final plan. Each prepares a draft plan and sends it to the state government, which decides.

District Planning Committee (Art. 243ZD)

• Definition: a District Planning Committee is a body the Constitution requires at the district level. It consolidates (merges into one) the plans of the panchayats and municipalities and prepares a draft development plan for the whole district [2].
• Where it is required: in every district.
• Composition:
• At least four-fifths (80%) of the members are elected by and from the elected members of the district-level panchayat (zila parishad) and the municipalities in the district.
• These seats are shared in proportion to the district's rural and urban populations. A mostly rural district therefore gets mostly panchayat members.

• State law decides the rest of the composition, how the chairperson is chosen and the committee's functions. In practice the chair is often the minister in charge of the district or the zila parishad chairperson.

• What the draft plan must consider (Art. 243ZD(3)):

• matters of common interest between panchayats and municipalities, including spatial planning (deciding which land is used for what), the sharing of water and other physical and natural resources, integrated development of infrastructure and environmental conservation [2];
• the extent and type of resources available, financial or otherwise [2];

• consultation with any institutions and organisations the Governor specifies.

• Final step: the DPC chairperson sends the draft plan to the state government.

• Exam trap: the DPC is in Part IXA (the 74th Amendment, on municipalities), not Part IX (the 73rd Amendment, on panchayats), even though most of a district is rural.

Metropolitan Planning Committee (Art. 243ZE)

• Metropolitan area (Art. 243P(c)):
• an area with a population of ten lakh (1 million) or more;
• it lies in one or more districts and has two or more municipalities, panchayats or other connected areas;

• the Governor declares it by public notification [2].

• Definition: a Metropolitan Planning Committee is the body the Constitution requires in every metropolitan area. It prepares a draft development plan for the whole metropolitan region [2].

• Composition:
• At least two-thirds of the members are elected by and from the elected members of the municipalities and the chairpersons of the panchayats in the area.
• These seats are shared in proportion to the municipal and panchayat populations of the area.

• State law may also add representatives of the Union government, the state government and other bodies, such as water or transport agencies.

• What the draft plan must consider (Art. 243ZE(3)):

• the plans already made by the municipalities and panchayats in the area;
• coordinated spatial planning, sharing of water and other resources, integrated infrastructure and environmental conservation;
• the goals and priorities set by the Union and the state;

• the investments that Union and state agencies are likely to make in the area.

• Final step: the MPC chairperson sends the draft plan to the state government.

DPC and MPC compared

Feature	DPC	MPC
Article	243ZD	243ZE
Where	Every district	Every metropolitan area (10 lakh or more, Art. 243P(c))
Minimum elected share	Four-fifths	Two-thirds
Who elects them	Elected members of the zila parishad and the municipalities	Elected municipal members and panchayat chairpersons
How seats are shared	Rural and urban population ratio	Municipal and panchayat population ratio
Output	Draft district development plan, sent to the state government	Draft metropolitan development plan, sent to the state government
Part	IXA (74th Amendment)	IXA (74th Amendment)

Why two planning levels?

• District plan: joins the rural and urban parts of a district into one plan, for example a district road or water network.
• Metropolitan plan: covers a city region that has spread past one city's boundary. For example, a metro rail line or a river basin may run through many municipalities and panchayats.
• Together: these are the Constitution's attempt at bottom-up planning. Local plans are put together at a higher level instead of plans being handed down from the state capital.

How it works in practice

• Many DPCs are dormant (inactive). Where they meet, their "plans" are often just a list of departmental schemes, not real integrated plans. Both the Second Administrative Reforms Commission's 6th Report, Local Governance (2007) and CAG state audits point this out.
• The Second ARC was set up on 31 August 2005 under M. Veerappa Moily [3]. Its 6th Report includes recommendations on MPCs (paras 3.10.2.8 and 4.5.5.6) [3].
• CAG audit example: Uttar Pradesh (2024 report on the 74th Amendment):
• DPCs and MPCs were not set up as the law requires [4];
• their meetings were not held [4];

• no draft plans were prepared [4].

• Few MPCs work. Kolkata's MPC (set up in 2001) is the usual example of one that functions (verify current).

• Who really plans the big cities: state development authorities, also called parastatals (state-created bodies that work outside the elected municipality). Examples are DDA (Delhi Development Authority, 1957), MMRDA (Mumbai, 1975), BDA (Bengaluru) and HMDA (Hyderabad). They make master plans (long-term land-use plans for a city) under state Town and Country Planning Acts. This sidelines both the elected municipality and the MPC (see §11 on parastatals).

Weak planning capacity: NITI Aayog (2021)

• Report: Reforms in Urban Planning Capacity in India, published by NITI Aayog in September 2021 [5][6].
• No master plans: 65% of India's 7,933 urban settlements have no master plan [5][7].
• Too few planners:
• India has about 5,000 registered town planners, roughly one planner for every 75,000 urban residents [5][7];

• the report puts the need for town planners at 12,213, which means 8,268 more posts across all states and UTs [5].

• Main proposals:

• a Central Sector Scheme called the "500 Healthy Cities Programme", run for 5 years [5][6];
• a statutory National Council of Town and Country Planners [5][6];
• a National Digital Platform of Town and Country Planners within MoHUA's National Urban Innovation Stack [5][6].

Who plans the region? The Greater Bengaluru case

• Greater Bengaluru Governance Bill, 2024 (Karnataka):
• introduced 23 July 2024 [8];

• allows up to seven city corporations in the Greater Bengaluru Area (the first draft allowed ten) [8].

• Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA):

• an apex body chaired by the Chief Minister, with the Chief Commissioner as member secretary [8];

• it is the planning authority and makes the master plan for infrastructure for the whole region [8].

• Bengaluru MPC: the Bill also sets up a separate Bengaluru Metropolitan Planning Committee, also chaired by the Chief Minister [8].

• Passage: the legislature passed the Bill on 10 March 2025, and the Governor returned it to the legislature for reconsideration [8]. Its later enactment and the 2025 split of the city into several corporations under the GBA should be checked for current status (verify current).
• The question it raises: when the Chief Minister chairs both the apex authority and the MPC, does regional planning stay with local elected bodies, as Art. 243ZE intends, or move back to the state?

Prelims Hooks

• Art. 243ZD → DPC; Art. 243ZE → MPC; Art. 243P(c) → definition of "metropolitan area" (population of 10 lakh or more, declared by the Governor by public notification).
• Trap: the DPC is in Part IXA (74th Amendment), not Part IX (73rd Amendment), though it plans for rural areas too.
• Elected share: DPC at least four-fifths; MPC at least two-thirds. Do not swap them.
• DPC electors: elected members of the district panchayat and the municipalities. MPC electors: elected municipal members and panchayat chairpersons.
• Both bodies prepare only a draft plan, which goes to the state government. Neither makes the final plan.
• The draft plans must cover spatial planning, sharing of water and natural resources, integrated infrastructure and environmental conservation.
• Kolkata MPC (2001) is the usual example of a working MPC. DDA (1957) and MMRDA (1975) are state development authorities (parastatals), not constitutional bodies.
• NITI Aayog (2021): 65% of 7,933 urban settlements have no master plan [5].
• Greater Bengaluru Governance Bill, 2024: up to 7 corporations; the GBA and the Bengaluru MPC are both chaired by the Chief Minister [8].

Mains Points

• Constitutional promise vs practice:
• Arts. 243ZD and 243ZE promise bottom-up, integrated planning.
• In practice DPCs are dormant, and CAG audits (e.g. Uttar Pradesh, 2024) found no meetings and no draft plans [4].

• The result is that planning stays with state departments and the 74th Amendment's spirit is hollowed out.

• Parastatals vs MPCs:

• Bodies like DDA and MMRDA control land and money but are not answerable to local voters.

• Possible reforms: give MPCs real power, make parastatal plans subject to MPC approval, and give MPCs their own planning staff.

• Capacity gap:

• With 65% of towns lacking a master plan and a shortage of about 8,268 planners, even a working DPC or MPC has little to work with [5].

• NITI Aayog's proposals (500 Healthy Cities Programme, a National Council of Town and Country Planners) link planning reform to building capacity [5][6].

• Who plans the region:

• Bengaluru's 2024–25 model puts the Chief Minister at the head of both the apex authority and the MPC [8].
• This shows the trade-off between coordinating a city region quickly and keeping the local democracy (decisions by elected local representatives) that the 74th Amendment intended.