The inclusion of caste enumeration in the upcoming Census marks a structural shift in how the Indian state understands society and designs welfare, representation and development policy.
Historical and institutional context
Independent India’s Censuses have routinely collected data only on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, while omitting comprehensive numbers for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and thousands of intermediate groups. This omission persisted even as the Mandal Commission and later commissions relied on older or indirect estimates to recommend reservation policies, creating a long-standing gap between policy and precise demographic evidence. The decision of the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs in April 2025 to add caste enumeration to a digital, app-based census thus breaks with a deliberate policy of avoiding full caste data since 1951.
Institutionally, the move is anchored in the Census Act, 1948, which provides the legal basis for collecting such information and obliges citizens to provide accurate data.At the same time, Supreme Court jurisprudence in cases like Indra Sawhney has consistently demanded “quantifiable data” to justify reservations and identify backwardness, indirectly pushing the state towards more robust caste-linked statistics.
Rationale: data, justice and governance
The core justification is that without reliable, contemporary caste-wise data, policies of affirmative action and welfare remain at best approximate.Current Census tables provide detailed data for SCs and STs, but there is no official, all-India count of OBCs and other backward or intermediate communities, forcing policymakers to rely on extrapolations from the 1931 Census, sample surveys or state-level exercises. A caste census promises to map not only the headcount of each group but also its education, occupation, income and access to services, allowing a multidimensional picture of deprivation rather than a binary “reserved vs general” divide.
From a governance perspective, this enables finer targeting of schemes, better design of reservations (including sub‑categorisation within OBCs), and correction of situations where dominant groups within a category capture most benefits. It can help align representation in legislatures, public employment and higher education with actual demographic shares and socio-economic indicators, rather than political bargaining alone.
Political economy and federal dynamics
Politically, caste enumeration comes at a time when opposition parties have framed “jitni aabadi, utna haq” (rights proportional to population) as a central slogan, pushing for redistribution of power and resources based on caste numbers.For the Union government, agreeing to caste enumeration is both a response to these pressures and a strategic move: it can claim ownership of data-driven social justice while managing the process centrally through a uniform census framework.Once data is available, however, almost every axis of politics—coalition formation, candidate selection, reservation demands—will likely be renegotiated around the new numbers.
Federal tensions are built in. Several states (for example, Bihar) have already conducted their own caste surveys, sometimes producing figures that differ from older national assumptions. A central caste census can harmonise or challenge these claims, raising questions about how state lists of backward classes, central OBC lists and national data will be reconciled, and which level of government ultimately controls the narrative on backwardness.
Methodological and ethical challenges
The technical difficulties are not trivial. The Socio-Economic and Caste Census (SECC) 2011 produced around 46.7 lakh distinct caste entries because respondents could write any name, making classification nearly impossible and the caste data practically unusable.[15][7] The new census intends to use pre-coded drop-down directories and digital tools to standardise responses, but India’s hyper-local jati landscape, overlapping identities and regional nomenclature still pose risks of misclassification.
There is also the problem of strategic self-reporting. Communities may claim higher status for prestige or lower status for access to reservations, a pattern observed both in colonial censuses and in contemporary state-level exercises. Ethically, there is a fundamental tension: the state must acknowledge caste to dismantle caste-based inequality, yet every act of official counting can also reify caste as a permanent label.Data privacy and protection become crucial here—misuse of detailed caste data in local conflicts, targeted discrimination or political micro‑targeting could deepen fractures rather than heal them.
Constitutional and normative dimensions
Constitutionally, caste enumeration intersects with equality (Article 14), special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes (Articles 15(4), 16(4)), Directive Principles obligating the state to promote educational and economic interests of weaker sections (Article 46), and the work of commissions under Articles 338B and 340.Courts have insisted that reservations and other affirmative actions be based on objective, periodically updated assessments, making a strong case for reliable data but not prescribing a particular method like a decennial census.
Normatively, the project must be evaluated against the constitutional goal of fraternity and the long-term aspiration of a society where birth does not fix destiny. If caste data becomes a tool solely for competitive claims—“more backward than thou”—and zero-sum quota politics, it could undermine social trust and the ideal of a casteless public sphere. If, however, it is embedded within a broader agenda of universal quality education, labour-intensive growth, urbanisation and legal protection against discrimination, caste enumeration can be framed as a temporary instrument to accelerate the erosion of caste-based disadvantage.
Implications for students and exam preparation
For UPSC and other civil services aspirants, the caste census issue provides an integrating theme across Indian society (GS1), governance and social justice (GS2), data and development (GS3) and ethics of equality (GS4).Students should be able to:
- Trace the historical trajectory from colonial censuses to post‑1951 Censuses, SECC 2011 and state caste surveys.
- Explain the need (data for reservations, welfare targeting, judicial demands), the concerns (identity hardening, data quality, politicisation), and the constitutional-federal context in a balanced way.
Analytically strong answers will go beyond listing pros and cons to show how the same instrument—caste data—can either democratise power and correct structural injustice, or entrench identities and polarise politics, depending on design, safeguards and the surrounding developmental agenda.