Hyderabad’s GHMC expansion is about control, not growth
HYDERABAD: Recent headlines celebrated Hyderabad becoming India’s “largest city” after the Telangana government merged 27 municipalities into the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC). This framing is misleading.
A city’s geographic and social reality is not the same as a municipal corporation’s jurisdiction. What expanded was an administrative boundary, not Hyderabad itself. By failing to draw this distinction, much of the media amplified a government announcement without analysis, leaving citizens confused about what actually changed.
This episode reflects a wider pattern. State governments can redraw municipal boundaries with ease far more easily than creating new districts, and incomparably more easily than forming new states. Such power allows routine manipulation of local governance structures, often without public debate.
Hollowing out local democracy
India’s Constitution envisages three levels of government: the Centre, states and local bodies panchayats and municipalities. Over the past two decades, this federal balance has steadily weakened.
As the Centre encroaches on state subjects, states have responded by stripping powers from local governments. Elected local representatives have been reduced to ceremonial figures, while real authority is consolidated with bureaucrats.
Telangana’s previous government exemplified this trend. Amendments to municipal and panchayat laws transferred substantive powers to collectors and commissioners. A 2018 provision even allowed Additional District Collectors to remove sarpanches for minor offences such as tree-cutting or fund misuse.
Today, councillors, corporators, sarpanches, ward members, Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituency and Zilla Praja Parishad Territorial Constituency members resemble festival idols visible during elections, powerless afterwards. They control no budgets, make no independent decisions and handle no appointments. Beyond receiving occasional grants, they can do little for constituents without approval from above.
The centralisation project
Last year, through 26 government orders issued in a single day, nearly 98 per cent of Telangana’s territory was brought under urban development authorities. These bodies subsume municipal and panchayat jurisdictions.
The media did not describe this as Telangana becoming “the largest state”. Yet the logic is identical to the GHMC merger: expand jurisdiction to centralise bureaucratic control.
Urbanisation in India is often portrayed as organic. In reality, it is engineered. Public investment in education, healthcare, jobs and infrastructure is concentrated in capital cities and large towns, while rural economies are systematically weakened. Migration follows. Expanding municipal boundaries is then presented as an administrative necessity.
A history of expansion
The GHMC’s growth is not new. In 2007, the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation merged with 12 municipalities and eight gram panchayats to form the GHMC.
The scale of expansion is stark:
1980s: About 54 sq km
2007: Expanded to 625 sq km
2025: After merging 27 municipalities within the Outer Ring Road, 2,053 sq km
The government now proposes splitting this area into three or six corporations, only to re-integrate them under a single authority. The objective is clear: consolidate funds and decisions under one command structure.
Other cities offer a contrast. New Delhi Municipal Council governs just 43 sq km. Mumbai and Chennai function with single corporations. Bengaluru was split into five corporations but placed under the Greater Bangalore Authority, chaired by the chief minister. Hyderabad appears to be following the same playbook.
The revenue reality
The government claims the merger will enable “grand plans” through consolidated finances. The numbers tell a different story.
Major municipal corporations’ revenues for 2025–26:
Mumbai: ₹43,159 crore
Bengaluru: ₹19,930 crore
Chennai: ₹8,267 crore
Delhi: ₹4,300 crore
New Delhi: ₹4,444 crore
Hyderabad’s gross city income is estimated at ₹8 lakh crore. Yet GHMC’s total revenue is barely ₹5,000 crore, with tax revenue around ₹2,000 crore. Even after the merger, collections may rise only to ₹6,000–6,500 crore.
The GHMC struggled to collect revenue from 625 sq km. Expanding to 2,053 sq km adds land, not revenue-generating capacity. Taxes have not risen in a decade. What is truly being consolidated is public land a monetisable asset to service debt and fund projects.
Bigger, but weaker
Despite its size, the GHMC lacks real authority. Key functions lie elsewhere:
Water and sewerage: Water Board
Education and healthcare: State government
Roads: Multiple agencies
Urban planning: Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority
The merger expands jurisdiction without restoring powers. The result is a larger but hollow institution geographic growth without functional strength.
What Hyderabad actually needs
No study assessed whether the merger benefits the 27 municipalities. The 2007 expansion worsened civic complexity in absorbed areas. Bigger, centralised institutions rarely solve local problems.
Hyderabad’s challenges are environmental pollution, water scarcity, inadequate sewerage and public health stress. The merger addresses none of these.
What could help:
An empowered urban commission to coordinate agencies
A comprehensive city master plan based on current land use
Restoration of municipal control over water, sewerage, roads, education and healthcare
Serious tax reform instead of land monetisation
The bottom line
This merger serves no public interest. It involved no democratic consultation, no impact assessment and no revenue analysis. It weakens local democracy while strengthening bureaucratic control.
Hyderabad does not need to be the “largest municipal corporation”. It needs decentralisation, transparency, functional authority and accountable governance. What it has received instead is ceremonial expansion one that concentrates power, monetises land and distances governance from citizens.
