Census 2027: Caste Data’s Utility to Be Assessed Only After Completion
New Delhi: With ‘caste’ set to be recorded in Census 2027 strictly as declared by respondents, the utility and application of the data will be evaluated only after enumeration is completed, according to officials and experts involved in the census exercise.
The government has decided that the decennial census will capture caste details based on self-declaration by individuals. However, the caste status of an individual under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category will not be recorded during population enumeration. Instead, officials told The Times of India that the digital mode of data collection, combined with modern AI-based tools, would help statisticians arrive at aggregate figures for specific castes.
Despite these technological aids, anomalies are expected. Experts pointed out that individuals might declare different spellings for the same caste, or mistake a religious sect for a caste, either due to lack of awareness or confusion. Officials said the government and census authorities would decide which spellings are acceptable for each caste category.
While a caste census could enable detailed analysis of social, economic, and educational indicators for particular groups, officials also acknowledged the risk of respondents under-declaring income or other indicators. This could be done to project a caste as “backward” and strengthen claims for OBC status. However, statisticians plan to detect misleading or falsified data through cross-referencing and value checks. Where deviations exceed acceptable limits, the data may be declared “unreliable” for policy decisions.
Explaining the qualitative difference between the Socio-Economic Caste Census (SECC) of 2011 and the recording of caste in Census 2027, an officer said the new exercise guarantees complete confidentiality. The Census Act bars individual data from being used as “legal evidence, government benefits, or public disclosure.” Additionally, compilation and segregation challenges can now be overcome with AI-based solutions, the officer said.
During discussions on the questionnaire, two proposals were considered but ultimately dropped: segregating non-SC, non-ST individuals into ‘general’ and ‘OBC’ categories, and providing a drop-down menu for OBC status. The main hurdle was the lack of alignment between central and state lists of OBCs. The central list is prepared on the recommendation of the National Commission for Backward Classes, while state lists are maintained by respective state backward classes commissions.
“The two lists do not perfectly overlap. The moot question for census authorities was: which list to go by, Central or state? Even for a given state, the Centre’s OBC list and the state’s list differ,” an officer said. Further, SC/ST lists are notified by a Presidential order, whereas OBC reservation in a state can be extended merely at the discretion of the state government. The final consensus was to avoid capturing OBC status altogether.
A second official explained practical difficulties. The census is spread over a year and requires administrative boundaries and SC/ST lists to remain frozen throughout. “Mid-census changes interfere with continuity, confuse enumerators, and throw calculations and tables haywire. If OBCs were captured and states, particularly those ruled by opposition parties, decided to extend OBC status to a new community midway through the census, there would be complications,” the official said.
It was also debated how the Centre could prevent such mid-course changes, given that granting OBC status is often influenced by political considerations. Officials reiterated that the utility and reliability of the caste data would be reviewed only after the census is complete, allowing authorities to assess its accuracy and applicability for policy-making.
