The Lok Sabha elections drew a sharp debate on reservation policies in general and caste census in particular. After the results, the formation of a coalition government with at least one key player, JD(U), having been supportive of a caste census, and the Lok Sabha leader of opposition’s unequivocal statement on such a census kept the spotlight on the issue. Further, the Supreme Court recently placed both caste census and reservation on the Centre-state scale.
One needs to add a caveat here. The demand for a caste census has distinctly different overtones as compared to the Supreme Court’s stand on reservations, especially among the Scheduled Castes. This narrative focuses much more on the caste census and its linkages with the debate on Other Backward Classes’ reservation.
To capture the public mood in the issue, we can draw on data from the Lokniti-CSDS pre-poll survey done during the run-up to the 2024 elections. When respondents were asked whether they thought the Congress and its allies were serious about a caste census or merely wished to use it as a political tool, around half the respondents felt there was a seriousness in the move. Close to a third (31 percent) felt it was being taken recourse to as a political tool. The rest were either unaware of the demand or did not take a stand on it.
Looked more closely, there was a clear lens of partisanship with which the issue was viewed. More than a third of those who supported the Congress and its allies felt the parties were serious about the census. Among those who said that they would vote the BJP, over four of every 10 felt it was a political tool employed to garner OBC votes. Among the OBCs themselves, more were likely to say it was being harnessed politically rather than representing genuine sincerity. This trend is also linked to the wider support base for the BJP in the 2024 elections among the OBCs as compared to the Congress.
Three other points merit attention, too. When it comes to reservation, one needs to make a categorical distinction between the philosophy of reservation and its practice. The visible social inequalities and the fight for social justice underscore the need for reservations. It is another matter that their practice has often left a lot to be desired.
This is especially true for OBC reservations. The Constitution permitted this reservation once the necessary steps were taken to identify who the OBCs were. The southern states took the initiative much earlier than the rest of the country. In many cases, this reservation preceded independence and the adoption of the Constitution. Providing OBC reservation at the national level took much longer and involved more than one backward class commission and intervention by the courts.
Backward caste reservations were done on the basis of an extrapolation from the last caste census done close to a century ago in 1931. Further, the list of OBCs varies between the central government and states. Thus, a particular community may well be included in a state list and excluded in the national list. The argument for a caste census is made in the light of an absence of authentic numbers on the relative population of different OBC groups.
Second, the Supreme Court’s 1992 judgement clearly underscored the need for excluding the creamy layer among the more socially, economically and educationally advanced OBCs. While the central and some state governments came out with criterions for defining the creamy layer, much of it has been whittled down over time or not been seriously adhered to. As a result, there are serious questions raised about the way in which reservation policies have been implemented.
Third, a logical extension of the creamy layer concept has been the expectation that the benefit of a particular level of OBC reservation should be prioritised for a first-generation beneficiary; a similar point was made by one judge in the recent Supreme Court ruling. The argument is that in the absence of such a limit, the same set of families could continue to enjoy the benefits of reservation generation after generation. It is also felt that an ‘elite capture’ of reservation benefits has adversely impacted the true realisation of the goals of social justice, deepening the long years of social inequality.
I return to the principal argument this analysis began with. Does the route to social justice lie in ensuring meaningful justice to those who remain backward and have not benefited from reservation because of the policies’ implementation? Would a caste census help identify such groups? Would the elite within each caste group favour the spread of reservation benefits to those who have been denied till now? The issue raises a complex web of challenges with no quick-fix solution.
(Views are personal)
Sandeep Shastri | Political scientist, National Coordinator of the Lokniti Network, and Director (academics) at the NITTE Education Trust
