No designation is printed beside these names. MCG's ward-wise contacts page labels every row "Nominated Member", including three rows that carry no ward number at all, so a single label has been applied to the whole table. It cannot describe a ward member: s.4(2) of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 makes ward members directly elected, and Gurugram went to the polls in March 2025. Rather than repeat a label the source contradicts, or substitute one of our own, we print the name and leave the designation out.
How to reach the ward
We hold no verified contact for this councillor
MCG publishes an address for every ward, and not one of them is an office address. Thirty-eight addresses cover the 36 wards: 36 at gmail.com, two at Yahoo, none at mcg.gov.in. Ten share no part of the name printed beside them — some of those are ward-branded, others read as a different person's account — one carries a ten-digit mobile number inside its local part, and MCG rewrites the "@" and the "." before displaying any of them. We do not republish representatives' personal contact details, and sending a complaint to an address that may belong to someone else is worse than sending none. Use the corporation's own routes instead.
MCG publishes one named contact per ward. We link to its page rather than copying the addresses: the site carries no licence, and it obfuscates the addresses before display.
Published by GMDA for its Grievance Redressal Portal, which handles complaints for both GMDA and MCG. Widely quoted as "the MCG helpline"; it is GMDA that publishes it.
What this seat can actually do
One of the members of the Corporation, directly elected from a ward under s.4(2) of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994. Gurugram has 36 wards, numbered 1 to 36, each with a named contact on MCG’s own ward-wise contacts page.
What that means here: A councillor’s power is the power of a member of a deliberative body: to raise, to move, to vote and to press. It is not the power to spend or to sanction.
Read the three below as procedure rather than as influence: each one is exercised in a sitting of the corporation or of its wards-committee, and the last of them is a power to make the Commissioner produce documents and furnish reports. That is why the useful ask of a councillor is not “fix this” but “raise this, and tell me what the Commissioner answered” — a request whose outcome you can go back and check.
Sit and vote in the corporation House, which is where the corporation's budget estimates are considered and passed.
Require the Commissioner to produce documents and furnish returns and reports — a power the Act gives the Corporation, exercised through the House rather than by a councillor alone.
No discretionary fund. We looked for one and found none — and we are not printing a zero. The Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 puts every rupee into a single Corporation Fund (s. 72), forbids payment that is not covered by a budget grant (s. 75), and confers its functions on the Corporation rather than on a councillor (ss. 43-44). MCG publishes no per-councillor allocation that we could find. That is a statement about the statute and about what is published, not proof that no executive order anywhere creates such a fund.
Spend from a purse of their own. All of the corporation's money sits in one Corporation Fund, and nothing may be paid out of it that is not covered by a budget grant.
Our reading of the cited provision, not something the source states
Act alone on the corporation's functions. The obligatory and discretionary functions in the Act belong to the Corporation as a body, not to an individual councillor.
Our reading of the cited provision, not something the source states
Decide anything about the metropolitan-scale roads, water, sewerage, drainage and mobility works in Gurugram. Those are GMDA's to plan, sanction, implement and maintain, and the councillor holds no seat on that Authority.
Whether any Haryana executive order or MCG budget line creates a per-councillor ward allocation. Nothing we could read says so either way.
There is no open ward-boundary dataset for Gurugram, so we cannot answer "which ward is this address in" from geometry. Wards exist here as 36 numbered identities, not as a map.
Who actually fixes it in Ward 21
These are the three things the ward tier is about. Which office owns any one of them depends on the road or the place, not on the ward number — so the test is the same in all 36 wards, and it is a test you can answer by looking.
🕳️Pothole
Which kind of road is the hole in — a national highway, a sector-dividing road, a road inside your own sector or colony, or a licensed colony the developer still runs?
interns.city holds reports with coordinates, but nothing that can put a coordinate inside a ward, so there is no honest way to say which of them belong to Ward 21 — and a list assembled by guessing would be worse than no list.
An open ward-boundary layer for Gurugram does exist, and it is properly licensed: OpenCity publishes a "Gurugram Wards Map 2024" in GeoJSON, Shapefile and KML, in the public domain. Earlier notes on this project recorded that no open layer existed at all; that was too strong, and the correction belongs here.
It draws 35 wards. The corporation now has 36 — MCG's own ward-wise contacts page lists wards 1 to 36 — so the layer predates the delimitation the March 2025 election was held on. We have not established which of the 35 boundaries survived that redraw and which moved, and a layer that is right for most of a city and quietly wrong for the rest is the thing this site refuses to ship: it already declines to name an assembly constituency for any point in Gurgaon, because the boundary file it has puts sectors there that the electoral roll puts next door. So there is no ward map here and no address-to-ward lookup, and that is the intended outcome rather than a feature still to come.
You can still see every report in the city on the live map, or add one.