Introduction. The Right to the CityThis chapter works with Lefebvre's 'Right to the City' (1996b) framework in order to consider the role of everyday and people-centred agency in 'smart' urban transformation. Authors such as Aurigi (2012), Kitchin (2015), Marvin et al. (2016), Rose (2015, and Sassen (2012) have critiqued the technologically deterministic language of smart city rhetoric, focusing on the fact that it tends to focus on ICT solutions that are applied top-down. The smart city agenda rarely addresses issues of social differences in already-existing cities (Datta, 2018), and this chapter argues that it is critical to reflect on a question raised by March and Ribera-Fumaz (2014, p. 826): "whose smartness and whose cities?". The smart city approach tends to focus on technological solutions to urban problems from the perspective of states and companies, whereas these technologies "need to serve and work for people and communities … in relation to setting local civic and infrastructural priorities" (Sadoway & Shekhar, 2014). Although citizen consultation and participation are often described in smart city proposals, there is a marked dearth of effective mechanisms and technologies for public engagement with respect to issues of distribution of urban resources and amenities such as water, roads, street lights, drainage, waste services, and proposed smart solutions to them. In the Global South context, India is a key actor in implementing a national level smart city project that arguably leads to the exacerbation of existing urban historical, material and social inequalities (