— ✍️ Dundra Kumara Swamy

The aspiration of Backward Classes (BCs) to know their rightful share in the country’s population is now taking the shape of a national movement. The demand for separate identification codes and a pre-defined drop-down list for recording Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the 2027 Census has become a subject of nationwide debate. Expressing concern over the proposed method of recording caste identities, BC organisations and social justice groups from different states are preparing for collective action. The call for a nationwide protest at Ramlila Maidan in New Delhi on November 28 has consequently assumed considerable significance.

The issue is not whether a caste census should be conducted. The fundamental question is how caste details should be recorded and uniformly classified. Question No. 10 in the questionnaire relating to the 2027 Census includes details concerning Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and caste. However, BC organisations are demanding a dedicated drop-down list and distinct identification codes for individual OBC communities. They apprehend that an open-ended registration system could result in the same caste being recorded under different names, leading to inconsistencies and confusion in official data.

Lessons from the Past

The Socio-Economic and Caste Census (SECC) conducted in 2011 reportedly recorded more than 4.7 million caste names, according to discussions surrounding the data. Variations in caste names across regions, sub-caste identities and differences in pronunciation made standardised classification a formidable challenge. Repeating a similar approach without addressing the shortcomings of the past could raise serious questions about the future utility of the information collected. The demand for a comprehensive standardised caste directory, distinct identification codes and a systematic mechanism to map sub-caste identities has therefore gained importance.

If the same caste is identified by different names across regions, how will it be classified as a single community? If different communities are recorded under identical names, how will they be distinguished? How will sub-caste identities be reconciled? What purpose would a caste census serve if these questions remain unanswered? Variations in spelling may appear insignificant. But when they translate into discrepancies in official statistics, it is the concerned social communities that stand to lose.

Telangana's Data Reveals the Reality

The experience of Telangana lends particular significance to this debate. According to the State Government's Socio-Economic, Educational, Employment, Political and Caste Survey (SEEEPC), the BC population stands at 2,00,35,840, accounting for 56.4 per cent of the state's population. The report has documented details of 133 BC communities. These figures do more than indicate population strength; they underline the importance of comprehensive data in understanding the social conditions of historically disadvantaged communities.

When Telangana has undertaken an extensive caste survey and identified the population share of BCs, is there not an equally compelling case for a more scientific caste census at the national level? The Telangana Legislative Assembly has also adopted a resolution seeking a separate column for BCs/OBCs in the Census. Discussions on BC reservations, educational opportunities, employment and political representation in the State are fundamentally dependent on reliable data. The same requirement applies at the national level.

BC Unity Across State Boundaries

Another significant development in this movement is the growing coordination among BC organisations. BC associations, OBC organisations, student groups and social justice activists from different states are coming together to raise a common demand at the national level. Their demands include distinct identification for every caste, a dedicated OBC drop-down option, a standardised caste directory and accurate collection of social statistics.

“Without recognition in population records, how can communities claim their rightful share in development?”

How Can Welfare Be Planned Without Population Data?

The demand for separate codes for BCs goes beyond the question of identity. At its core, it concerns the equitable distribution of resources. Which communities remain educationally disadvantaged? What is their representation in government employment? How much political representation do different social groups enjoy? Are the benefits of welfare schemes reaching the most marginalised sections? Reliable and comprehensive statistics are essential to answer these questions. How can welfare policies be formulated without accurate population data? How can equal opportunities be ensured without measuring social backwardness? How can inequalities be corrected when their extent remains unknown?

Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution provide the framework for special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes. Article 340 provides for the appointment of commissions to examine the conditions of backward classes. The recommendations of the Mandal Commission marked a significant turning point in the national discourse on the rights of disadvantaged communities. Yet, the need for comprehensive national data on the population, social conditions, education, employment and representation of BCs continues to remain pressing.

The Centre's Responsibility and the Way Forward

Having decided to conduct a caste census, the Central Government must ensure that the exercise is scientifically designed and produces reliable data. State-wise caste lists need to be coordinated. Different names used for the same caste must be appropriately mapped. The possibility of assigning a distinct identification number to each caste should be examined. Consultations must be held with State Governments, BC Commissions, social scientists and representatives of caste organisations. The information collected must be transparent and scientifically classified, while adequate safeguards must also protect individual privacy.

The proposed protest in Delhi on November 28 must go beyond slogans and demonstrations. BC organisations from different states must work towards a common programme of action. The demand for social justice must transcend political affiliations. Personal rivalries and regional differences should give way to a collective commitment to two essential objectives: accuracy in caste enumeration and equality in social representation.

This Is Not Merely a Count of Castes, but a Recognition of Rights

At its core, this controversy is not merely a struggle for a separate code or a drop-down list. It represents the aspiration of disadvantaged communities to secure official recognition, bring their concerns into the mainstream of public policy and obtain an equitable share in the country's development. Population proportion alone cannot be treated as the sole determinant of reservations. Nevertheless, reliable statistics are indispensable for informed social policy. Counting the population is only the first step. Identifying inequalities through that data and ensuring equitable opportunities is the larger objective.

The vision of social democracy articulated by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar must not remain confined to the pages of the Constitution. It must find expression in education, employment, political representation and the distribution of the benefits of development. Justice for BCs requires, first and foremost, an accurate understanding of their population and social conditions. These findings must then serve as a basis for policy decisions. Only when every caste is accurately recognised in the Census can the country establish a credible foundation for ensuring every community its rightful place in the pursuit of social justice.

- The author is a High Court advocate, National President BC Dal and Chairman of National BC Reservation Struggle Coordination JAC.