Caste Census And Substantive Equality In India - Constitutional And Policy Perspectives

Author: LawSphereX

Category: Constitutional & Human Rights

Published: 2026-08-23T18:44:23.239Z

Updated: 2026-08-30T07:10:42.680Z

CASTE CENSUS AND SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY IN INDIA:

CONSTITUTIONAL AND POLICY PERSPECTIVES

Aakanksha Rajesh, LL.B., IMS Law College, Noida

ABSTRACT

The socio-political design of India has been centred around caste for a long time now, yet there remains a state of comprehensive caste data vacuum, which has inevitably deferred the formulation of policies for social justice. This article delineates the historical, constitutional and judicial dimensions of caste enumeration, while highlighting Babasaheb’s tenacious appeal for a detailed caste census as an instrument for achieving the constitutional promise of substantive equality. It traces the trajectory of caste data collection from the colonial period to post-independence India, and probes into the contemporary development such as the 2011 Socio-Economic and Caste Census and recent state-level surveys carried out in Bihar, Karnataka and Telangana. Caste enumeration is critically studied within the framework of constitutional provisions of affirmative action.

The article further analyses how judicial interpretations have undergone a shift from reliance on formal notions of equality to a substantive understanding that recognises structural disadvantage. Drawing on empirical data and case law, the article contends that a periodic caste enumeration is indispensable to ensure effective resource allocation, address intra and inter-group disparities and advance the constitutional promise of substantive equality. The forthcoming 2027 caste census presents a golden opportunity to pursue Babasaheb Ambedkar’s vision of data-driven social reform. Keywords: Caste Census, Substantive Equality, Affirmative Action, Reservation policy, Social Justice, Constitutional Law

INTRODUCTION

The foremost crusader for the rights and dignity of the oppressed, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, in his 1935 work Untouchables or the Children of India’s Ghetto, asserted, “So long as caste continues to be used as one of the distinguishing features of an individual’s official and social identity it cannot be claimed that a decennial enumeration helps to perpetuate an undesirable institution. ”1 Through this stirring remark, Babasaheb reminded the nation that confronting the harrowing social realities is the first step towards dismantling them. Throughout his lifelong pursuit of social justice, Dr Ambedkar advocated for an exhaustive and comprehensive caste census, firmly believing it to be a crucial channel for facilitating social justice, policy formulation, and equitable representation.

However, his demand was eventually buried under the tidal notion of “castelessness” which swept through the sociopolitical scene of India in the 1950s. 2 Nationalist leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru hoped that somehow the age-old entrenchment of caste would fade away in a modern, secular India, and consequently, the practice of decennial collection of caste-based data was brought to an end. But, sadly, this assertion was premised on an idealistic and fanciful belief that miserably failed to acknowledge the fact that the age-old notion of caste is not only a social construct that can be dismantled with a few statutory provisions, but a fractured psychological framework that has continued to distort the collective consciousness of society. This year marks the 78th year of independence.

India, the mother of democracy, promised all its citizens a just, equitable, democratic and inclusive society that would uphold the dignity and rights of all. However, the deeply lamentable incidents of gruesome violence against Dalits, such as assault, beatings, mob lynching, harassment, public humiliation, etc. , have time and again continued to undermine the constitutional promise of substantive equality. Amidst this, Babasaheb’s vision that caste data would serve as empirical evidence to formulate policies of affirmative action and a catalyst for social reform stands as pertinent as ever. The central government’s recent announcement of including caste enumeration as part of the next decennial population census, scheduled for 2027, has emerged as a beacon of hope for the case of minorities. Nevertheless, Dr Ambedkar’s apprehension against the politicisation of census

1 B.R. AMBEDKAR, Untouchables or the Children of India’s Ghetto (1945).

2 Satish Deshpande, Caste and Castelessness

Towards a Biography of the “General Category,” 48 ECON. & POL. WKLY. 32 (2013). data and its misuse for political gain has a newfound relevance, especially with the debates surrounding the upcoming census.3

HISTORICAL AND POLICY

BACKGROUND

In order to truly appreciate the significance of a comprehensive caste census, it is of the utmost essence to make a meticulous inquiry into the historical roots of the caste system. In his seminal work- “Who Were the Shudras? ”, Dr Ambedkar debunks the traditional narrative of the caste system’s origin as based solely on the divine Varna Theory. 4 This theory is based on the Purusha Sukta Hymn of the Rigveda and hence perpetuates the dogmatic notion that the four varnas originated from different parts of the cosmic being called Purusha’s body, symbolising their roles and position in the hierarchy. The uppermost caste- Brahmins were said to originate from the mouth of Purusha, followed by Kshatriyas, who originated from the arms, Vaishyas from the thighs and Shudras from the feet.

Over centuries, texts like the Manusmriti and social practices have continued to reinforce the Varna System, thus fanning the social stratification and practices of systematic exclusion. 5 Dr Ambedkar remained firm in his assertion that caste is a tool of oppression, legalised through religious texts and societal acceptance, which requires dismantling through a combination of constitutional safeguards and social reform. He persistently maintained that this systematic eradication necessitates an in-depth understanding of social gradation, emphasising the need for caste data. The first comprehensive census was initiated during the tenure of Viceroy Lord Mayo and systematised by 1881. However, the first detailed caste census had already been conducted by the British government a decade before, in the 1871-72 census.

From 1881 onwards, caste enumeration became a regular part of every decadal census under British rule, and this practice continued till the 1931 census. Most notably, the census of 1901, carried out under Herbert Risley, remarkably institutionalised and standardised caste enumeration. Risley, a British ethnographer and colonial administrator, was appointed as the census commissioner for the decennial census of India in 1901. Applying the Anthropometric Methods and Racial Theory, 3 Ayan Guha, Ambedkar Supported Caste Census, Not Its Politicisation, INDIAN EXPRESS (Jan. 15, 2025), https://indianexpress. com/article/opinion/columns/ambedkar-supported-caste-census-9782368/.

4 B.R. AMBEDKAR, Who Were the Shudras? (1946).

5 Caste System in Ancient India

Varna Ideals in Vedic Times, WORLD HISTORY ENCYCLOPEDIA, https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1152/caste-system-in-ancient-india/ (last visited Dec. 22, 2025).

Risley sought to classify Indians into seven supposed racial groups, including Aryans, Dravidians, Mongoloids, etc. , and linked these to caste categories. Though Risley’s methods attracted widespread criticism for being Eurocentric, his approach contributed to the freezing of fluid community identities into rigid, state-enforced categories. 6 This standardised scheme for classification was also adopted in later censuses and hence had an enduring effect on Indian social and political structure. However, during the 1931 census, this practice saw widespread political resistance, especially from nationalist movements led by Mahatma Gandhi, who viewed caste enumeration as a hindrance to the prospect of national unity. Subsequently, caste enumeration was discontinued in the post-independence census.

Nevertheless, states were allowed to prepare their own list of Other Backward Classes (OBCs) from 1961 for affirmative action. A major boost to the pursuit of affirmative action came with the establishment of the Mandal Commission or the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Commission, in 1979. The commission was tasked with the identification of Backward Classes and for making further recommendations. The findings of the commission were remarkable in the way that it not only contributed to expanding the scope of affirmative action beyond SCs and STs but also significantly highlighted the necessity for detailed caste data to facilitate effective policy implementation and representation for backward classes. Thus, the demand for a detailed cate enumeration, which had lain dormant since 1931, found a renewed relevance in the mainstream political discourse.

Subsequently, in 2011, the UPA government conducted a nationwide Socio-Economic and Caste Census (SECC), with an objective to fill the caste data void and help identify beneficiaries for the reservation and welfare scheme. However, it is crucial to note the fact that the data of SECC-2011 was never released, citing the issues of data fallacies and irregularities. The government maintained that the census data are incorrect, hence discarding them as unusable for policymaking. In essence, the sheer number and fluidity of caste identities across various regions created methodological difficulties in classification, standardisation and accurate enumeration, resulting in unreliable data. With the recent debates surrounding the upcoming caste census, the issue of data fallacies and irregularities has once again occupied

6 H.H. Risley & E.A. Gait, Report on the Census of India, 1901, RURAL INDIA ONLINE,

https://ruralindiaonline. org/en/library/resource/report-on-the-census-of-india-1901/ (1903) (last visited Dec. 23, 2025). centre stage and has necessitated a critical reassessment of existing enumeration methods. 7 Notably enough, in recent years, various state-level efforts like those of Bihar and Karnataka have produced promising results. For instance, the Bihar Caste Survey (2022-23) covered more than 130 million people and enquired about 214 castes. Findings revealed that OBCs and EBCs comprised over 63% of the state’s population, with SCs at 20%, STs at 1. 6% and Forward Castes at 15. 5%. These results have been greatly instrumental in reservation policy adjustments and influencing local welfare policies. In view of the survey findings that OBCs, EBCs, SCs and STs comprise 85% of the state’s population.

The Bihar Assembly passed a bill increasing the combined reservation for the said group in jobs and admissions to 65%. 8 Similarly, from 2021-23, Karnataka’s Backward Classes Commission conducted a state-wide caste survey, which revealed that OBCs comprise about 69. 6% of the population. This prompted a demand for an increased OBC quota, and a new category named Most Backward Classes (MBCs) was identified. 9 On similar lines, in 2023, Telangana carried out door-to-door surveys to enumerate caste and communities and the data was further utilised to inform targeted welfare schemes. CONSTITUTIONAL DIMENSIONS When one embarks on a meticulous examination of the trajectory of affirmative action policies, one surely concludes that a caste census is not only a policy necessity but a constitutional imperative to realise substantive equality.

Thereby, it is crucial to probe into the constitutional dimensions of caste. The constitutional provisions with regard to caste follow a three-layered framework. At the core lies the special provisions for SCs and STs guaranteed under Articles 15(4), 15(5), 16(4), 16(4A), 16(4B), 243-D(4), 243-T(4), 330 and 332. The outer circle expands these safeguards to include OBCs and SEBCs, with special provisions guaranteed under Articles 15(4), 15(5), 16(4), 243-D(6) and 243-T(6). The outermost circle further expands these safeguards to the Economically Weaker Sections under Articles 15(6) and 16(6). In addition, time and again,

7 Kiran Kumar Gowd, The Politics and History Behind the Caste Census, THE NEWS MINUTE (May 4, 2025),

https://www.thenewsminute.com/news/the-politics-and-history-behind-the-caste-census (last visited Dec. 23, 2025).

8 Government of Bihar, Bihar Caste-Based Survey Report (2023).

9 Karnataka State Backward Commission, Caste Survey Report (2023).

various national-level commissions have been constituted under Article 340 to scrutinise the status of SEBCs, most notably the Kaka Kalelkar Commission in 1953 and the BP Mandal Commission in 1979. The Kaka Kalelkar Commission was appointed in 1953 to identify socially and educationally backward classes and recommend measures for their upliftment. The report listed 2399 backward castes and communities across India and classified 837 of them as ‘most backward’. The commission defined various criteria for determining social and educational backwardness, viz. , low status in the caste hierarchy; lack of educational advancement; inadequate representation in government services; and poor participation in trade, commerce and industry.

Consequently, it recommended extensive reservation in education and jobs, namely 70% seats in technical and professional institutes for backward classes and 25% reservation in Class I government jobs, 33. 5% in Class II and 40% in Class III and Class IV. 10 Most significantly, it advocated for caste-wise population enumeration in the 1961 census to quantify backwardness more accurately. However, despite the revelatory findings of the Commission, most of its recommendations were not implemented, largely due to concerns over dependence on caste as the sole criterion and Kaka Kalelkar’s own reservation. In his covering letter to the President dated March 30, 1955, Kalelkar wrote, “My eyes were, however, opened to the dangers of suggesting remedies on a caste basis when I discovered that it was going to have the most unhealthy effect on the Muslim and Christian sections of the nation.

” This eventually stalled the first attempt in post independence India to expand affirmative action policies and a scope for nationwide caste enumeration. Further, in a venture to render formal recognition to the Other Backward Classes, the Morarji Desai government in 1979 constituted the Mandal Commission. The key findings of the commission were indeed groundbreaking, as it revealed that OBCs constitute about 52% of India’s population, the section which remained historically marginalised for so long. The report identified over 3700 caste groups as socially and educationally backward, applying indicators such as educational levels, representation in public employment, and overall social standing. Widespread deprivation among OBCs in terms of literacy, income levels, landholding and government employment was identified.

The commission recommended a 27% quota for OBCs in central government jobs and educational institutions (this, combined with the existing 22. 5% for SCs and STs, meant total reservation of about 50%). It further proposed the

10 Kaka Kalelkar Commission, Report of the Backward Classes Commission (1955).

exclusion of ‘creamy layers’, i. e. economically advanced members of OBCs, from reservation benefits. 11 Notably, even the Mandal Commission was forced to rely on extrapolated and dated census figures, highlighting the structural limitations of affirmative action in absence of contemporary caste data. Consequently, it called for efficient data collection through periodic caste enumeration in censuses. The Mandal Commission had an enduring impact on the socio-political fabric of the nation. Its impact was not only confined to bringing OBCs within the ambit of affirmative action, but it also catalysed large-scale political mobilisation among OBC groups, fuelled by upper caste agitations and polarising debates over meritocracy. This marked the genesis of the flawed narrative that social justice was achieved at the expense of competence.

The Davinder Singh judgement delivered by the Supreme Court of India in 2024 dismantled this narrative by fundamentally redefining equality, merit and reservation jurisprudence. The Apex Court, by a 6:1 majority, upheld the constitutional validity of sub-classification within SCs and STs, in order to ensure that reservation benefits reach the most disadvantaged sub-groups rather than being monopolised by a few privileged castes. 12 This judgement virtually struck down the observation made in the matter of E. V. Chinnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh that SCs and STs should be treated as homogeneous classes. 13 The judgement underscored “substantive equality” instead of “formal equality”. It recognised that equal treatment of socially unequal groups can perpetuate discrimination.

The ruling acknowledged that the categories benefiting from reservation are internally diverse with varying levels of disadvantage and social exclusion. Most essentially, the judgment extended the notion of “creamy layer” to SCs and STs, ensuring that those who can compete on their merits are not given unfair advantages. Thus, the ruling endeavours to settle the contention between social justice and competence by posing the two as complementary goals and not opposing values. The judgment reaffirmed the idea that affirmative action aimed at uplifting the genuinely disadvantaged does not compromise merit; it levels an uneven playing field to allow merit to emerge fairly.

It also mandated the states to collect concrete and empirical data showing backwardness and pushed for an evidentiary approach, which will further ensure that merit and competence are balanced with social justice considerations.

11 Backward Classes Commission, Report of the Backward Classes Commission (1980).

12 State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh, 2024 INSC 562.

13 E. V. Chinnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2005) 1 SCC 394.

FROM FORMAL TO SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY: Judiciary’s evolving approach In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle stated, “It is unjust to treat equals unequally; it is equally unjust to treat unequals equally. ” In his account, he systematically expounds the two-fold division of justice as ‘distributive’ and ‘corrective’. The former is based on the long-standing notion of proportional equality in distributions like honours and resources, whereas the latter stems from the idea of arithmetic equality in rectifying wrongs. 14 The doctrine of affirmative action can be said to be virtually based on Aristotle’s concept of corrective equality. The Indian Judiciary took considerable time to fully embrace the principle of corrective and substantive equality. Post-independence rulings stressed “sameness” in treatment, viewing reservation as an exception to equality. In the matter of State of Madras v.

Champaram Dorairajan (1951), the Hon’ble Supreme Court struck down caste-based quota in education as violative of Article 15(1), reaffirming formal equality over corrective measures. 15 The stance was further reinforced in T. Devadasan v. Union of India (1964), where the Apex Court limited reservation to 50% under Article 16(4), treating them as a narrow exception to merit-based equality. 16 In the further batch of matters, the judiciary sought to introduce ‘flexibility’ by laying down a test of reasonable classification under Article 14, allowing differential treatment if based on intelligible differentia. Hence, in M. R. Balaji v. State of Mysore (1963), reservation was upheld, but a limit was placed in order to balance formal equality while giving recognition to backwardness. 17 State of Kerala v. N. M.

Thomas (1976) marked a pivotal shift when Justice Krishna Iyer declared that Article 16(4) is not an exception but a facet of equality itself. 18 This marked a decisive shift towards the notion of substantive equality. Finally, the Indira Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) judgement, bolstered substantive equality by reinterpreting affirmative action as imperative to achieving real equality. 19 It further emphasised that true equality necessitates addressing historical and social disadvantages through differential treatment, ensuring

14 Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics bk. V (W.D. Ross trans., Internet Classics Archive 1994-2000)

15 State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan, AIR 1951 SC 226.

16 T. Sevadasan v. Union of India, AIR 1964 SC 179.

17 M. R. Balaji v. State of Mysore, AIR 1963 SC 649.

18 State of Kerala v. N. M. Thomas, (1976) 2 SCC 310.

19 Indira Sawhney v. Union of India, 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217.

substantive equality of opportunity for the marginalised. By validating Mandal recommendations, the judgment debunked the narrative that reservations undermine meritocracy and asserted that social justice creates a level playing field. CENSUS AND SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY Underscoring the idea of substantive equality through judicial decisions is one thing; translating it into practice is quite another. In a country as vast and diverse as India, the realisation of substantive equality will remain a far-fetched dream without robust and reliable caste data. First and foremost step towards enabling affirmative action is the targeted identification of backwardness. Reliance on outdated estimates will brutally defeat the essence of corrective justice. Accurate caste demographies not only reveal inter-group backwardness but also cast light on intra-group disparities.

This ensures that benefits reach the most remote sections of society, like Extremely Backward Classes, as identified in Bihar’s survey. An efficient caste data reinforces the idea of proportional resource allocation. A key scholarly study titled “Caste, local governance effectiveness, and multidimensional poverty in India” critically analysed how the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe population densities correlate with rural Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) across Indian states via regression and Pearson correlation. 20 The study highlighted persistent deprivation where resources are not scaled to demographic shares. In a nutshell, proportional resource allocation, guided by accurate caste data, will optimise resource use, reduce disparities and correct historical exclusion.

Tailored allocation maximises impact by ensuring that affirmative aid reaches those in greatest need and effectively reduces poverty gaps faster than any blanket scheme. In addition, adequate supervision of progress coupled with periodic adjustments is the next requisite to effectively relegate caste-based inequality. Hence, the practice of decennial caste data collection will track socio-economic mobility. Lastly, replacing century-old figures with current realities supports constitutional mandates under Article 340 and sets the ground for the advancement of social

20 Amarachi O. Ogbonna, Charles A. Adams Ekuban, C. M. Krishnan & P. K. Viswanathan, Caste, Local

Governance Effectiveness, and Multidimensional Poverty in Rural India: Some Evidences, 10 Frontiers in Sociology 1482825 (2025), https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2025.1482825. justice as envisaged by Babasaheb Ambedkar.

CONCLUSION

AND WAY FORWARD When one engages in an unbiased assessment of age old system of systematic exclusion of certain caste identities from the mainstream society, the perpetual question arises- What can be done to correct it? At this point, one must accept the hard reality that this age-old entrenchment of caste cannot be magically eradicated by the implementation of a few policy programmes. Nevertheless, it is perhaps the most important function of any modern welfare state to begin the amelioration of an existing problem by pinpointing the problem itself and then proceeding with the redressal. Similarly, for the problem of caste-based backwardness, which has continued to plague the Indian society for centuries, an effective caste assessment will serve as the groundwork for a long process of its relegation.

The announcement of the upcoming caste census has emerged as a harbinger of change for the marginalised communities. It is a result of the realisation that data is one of the most potent instruments of justice. While the decision has been welcomed by many, it has also been met with simultaneous criticism. Debates surrounding data fallacies and effective data collection mechanism has emerged as a central concern. There is a heightened need to ensure that the technical and administrative shortcomings of the 2011 SECC are not repeated. Only a transparent, methodologically strong and constitutionally guided enumeration can breathe life into the constitutional promise of substantive equality as envisaged by Babasaheb Ambedkar.

REFERENCES

Ambedkar, B. R. (1979): “Thoughts on Linguistic States,” Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches (BAWS), Vol 1, New Delhi: Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. Chandrachud, Abhinav (2023): These Seats are Reserved: Caste, Quotas and the Constitution of India, Gurgaon: Penguin Random House. Singh, Mihir, Do We Need a Caste-Based Census? (March 2, 2022). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn. com/abstract=4048034 or http://dx. doi. org/10. 2139/ssrn. 4048034 How a Caste Census Could Transform India’s Reservation Policies, OXFORD HUM. RTS. HUB (last visited Dec. 23, 2025), https://ohrh. law. ox. ac. uk/how-a-caste-census-couldtransform-indias-reservation-policies/. Kumar, Surendra and Chakka, Benarji, Confronting Castelessness: The Caste Census and the Future of Substantive Equality in India (July 01, 2025). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn. com/abstract=5557599 or http://dx. doi.

org/10. 2139/ssrn. 5557599