Municipalities constitute the backbone of urban governance in India and represent the third tier of the federal structure envisaged under the Constitution. Their role has become increasingly significant in the context of rapid urbanization, expanding urban populations, and growing demands for civic amenities. The constitutional recognition of municipalities through the Seventy-Fourth Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 marked a major milestone in decentralizing power and strengthening local self-government. The amendment sought to transform municipalities into institutions of self-governance by providing them with a constitutional status, defined functions, a regular electoral system, and mechanisms for financial empowerment. Despite these reforms, the working of municipalities continues to be marked by structural, financial, administrative, and political challenges that constrain their effectiveness. The constitutional framework provides a threefold classification of urban local bodies: Nagar Panchayats for transitional areas, Municipal Councils for smaller urban areas, and Municipal Corporations for larger cities. The Twelfth Schedule of the Constitution lists eighteen functions that may be devolved to municipalities, including urban planning, regulation of land use, water supply, sanitation, public health, urban poverty alleviation, and environmental protection. State governments are responsible for endowing municipalities with the authority and resources necessary to perform these functions. In practice, however, the extent of devolution varies considerably across states, resulting in uneven capacity and performance of municipalities. The working of municipalities can be examined in terms of their institutional structure, functional performance, financial management, and relationship with other levels of government. Municipally elected councils, headed by mayors or chairpersons, form the political wing, while the executive wing is generally led by a municipal commissioner or chief officer appointed by the state government. This dual structure often creates tensions between the elected leadership and the bureaucracy. While elected representatives are expected to articulate local needs and priorities, administrative control largely remains with state-appointed officials, limiting the autonomy of municipalities. In terms of