The rational or legal justification of the Central Government for not disclosing the caste census data does not come under scrutiny.
The Narendra Modi government has finally explained its reasons in detail. Disclosure of caste statistics gathered in Socio-Economic and Caste Census (SECC) 2011. The government’s affidavit filed in the Supreme Court of India last month by the Union Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment – in response to a writ petition by the Maharashtra government – has sought to do away with the exclusion of full caste enumeration in the upcoming years. Census exercise, expected to resume in 2022 after Inspired by the COVID-19 pandemic Interrupt official arguments focus on the impracticality of full caste counts, suggesting that operational difficulties are enormous.
‘Mistakes’, Outstanding ‘Errors’
As mentioned in the affidavit, while the total number of castes counted in the 1931 census was 4,147, SECC of 2011 Returned more than 46 lakh caste names. Such a large number of castes were returned partly because Indian people use their own caste, sub-caste, clan names. gotra and surnames interchangeably. Moreover, the enumerators also got confused about the spelling and classification of castes. The question is, if the 46 lakh caste names returned in SECC 2011 were the result of alleged “counters’ mistakes” or “inherent lapses in the method of census” in official affidavits, why can’t they be mistakes and lapses can be fixed in a decade. will be fixed?
The Union Cabinet had appointed an expert committee under the chairmanship of the then NITI Aayog Deputy Chairman Arvind Panagariya returned it to SECC 2011 in July 2015 alleging classification of caste names. The government affidavit acknowledged that no other member was appointed to the committee. Therefore, neither the committee met nor fulfilled its mandate in six years. Who is responsible for this negligence?
The extent of errors in caste enumeration is also being projected exaggeratedly. The affidavit shows, citing the example of Maharashtra, that the total number of castes listed in the Central List of Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) and the State List of Other Backward Classes (OBC) is 494. Returned by SECC 2011 for was 4.28 Lakh. But the affidavit also states that “99% of the castes enumerated” [a] population of less than 100 persons”. Out of the total population of 10.3 crore in the state, 8.8 crore people can be classified under 2,440 castes, each with a population of more than 1,000. Hence, the prevalence of caste names and their The resulting difficulty in classification has arisen not because of the majority, but because of a small proportion of the total population.
This is also corroborated by the Action Taken Report on the recommendations of the Standing Committee on Rural Development on “BPL Survey (currently Socio Economic and Caste Census, 2011)”. In this report dated August 31, 2016, the central government is explicitly quoted as saying that out of 118.64 crore people in SECC 2011 data errors on caste and religion, 1.34 crore, i.e. only 1% of the total enumerated population Is. How can the same government now flag the entire findings of the caste census as “full of mistakes and inaccuracies”?
Complicated, Yet Viable
Population census in a vast and uniquely diverse country like India may not be a complicated process. For decades, the census machinery has gone down a learning curve, reliably enumerating complex categories such as language and religion, which also exhibit considerable diversity. For example, as per the 2018 Paper 1 on Language Census of 2011, the total number of initial crude returns of mother tongues for the country as a whole was 19,569. After scrutiny, editing and linguistic grouping, these crude returns were first rationalized into 1,369 mother tongues and later classified on the basis of at least 10,000 or more speakers for 22 scheduled and 99 non-scheduled languages, i.e. pan-India Level 121 languages. Level.
While caste in the Indian context appears to be an even more complex category than language, the techniques for computing and analyzing complex big data have become easily accessible today. Nevertheless, the affidavit cited the absence of an All India Registry of Castes to rule out the conduct of full caste enumeration in the ensuing census. Why such a registry of castes and tribes could not be made till date by combining the Central List of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and the State List of OBCs by the Union and State Governments working together?
The total number of castes and tribes included in those lists would currently be around 5,000 at the all-India level. For any individual state, the maximum number of castes cannot exceed 500. The rationalization and classification of many raw castes goes back to a maximum of 500 castes at the state level or about 5,000 castes at the all India level, which is quite possible. Training manuals for enumerators may also be prepared on the basis of a single, consolidated caste list for each state.
This could so far have been achieved by an expert committee appointed by the Union Cabinet, but for its sheer inefficiency. Instead of rectifying its administrative failures, the central government is now citing it as evidence for the formulation of the logistical impossibility theorem.
within the framework
The government’s affidavit also cites the absence of clear constitutional or statutory requirements for enumeration of castes other than SCs and STs in the census. However, Articles 15(4) and 15(5) of the Constitution of India have explicitly recognized “socially and educationally backward classes of citizens” as a separate category from the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, and the state is entitled to their advancement. Special provision has been made for Therefore enumerating the population of these backward classes would be too much within the constitutional framework.
Nevertheless, the official affidavit alleges that the full caste enumeration could compromise the basic integrity of the census exercise, distorting the fundamental population count. If the enumeration of different castes under the categories “SC”, “ST” and “Others” in all censuses since 1951 has not resulted in such distorted results, then additional enumeration under the second “OBC” category will result in such distorted results. Why should there be destruction? Such intentional intimidation has no basis in the laws or the Constitution.
The logical or legal justification of the central government for not disclosing the caste census data and for refusing to conduct the full caste enumeration in the ensuing census does not come under scrutiny. Rather, it creates grounds for doubt whether the establishment has vested interests in concealing the actual number and proportion of different castes in the Indian population. Such gimmicks will not be acceptable to a wide spectrum of social movements and political parties, which are demanding a complete caste enumeration.
Prasenjit Bose is an economist and activist based in Kolkata
.