🚨 UPSC EXAM NOTES presents the December edition of our comprehensive monthly guide. Access it  to enhance your preparation. We value your input - share your thoughts and recommendations in the comments section or via email at Support@upscexamnotes.com 🚨

Critical Topics and Their Significance for the UPSC CSE Examination on December 06, 2024

Daily Insights and Initiatives for UPSC Exam Notes: Comprehensive explanations and high-quality material provided regularly for students

Is the caste Census a useful exercise?

For Preliminary Examination:  Current events of national and international importance

For Mains Examination: GS II - Indian Polity & Governance

Context:

The demand for a caste Census has become a heated political issue, fuelled by calls from opposition leaders, NGOs, and, more recently, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) also adding itself to the cohort. Proponents argue that such a Census would determine the population sizes of various castes and that these numbers can be used to provide a proportionate share to each caste in government jobs, land, and wealth.

Read about:

Census

Caste Census

Key takeaways:

The demand for a caste census has become a contentious political issue, driven by appeals from opposition parties, NGOs, and recently, even the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) joining the debate. Advocates believe that such a census would reveal the population distribution of different castes, enabling proportional allocation of resources such as government jobs, land, and wealth.

This article explores why collecting caste data at an individual level is likely to be an ineffective exercise and critiques the concept of caste-based proportional reservations as a regressive approach.

Source: The Hindu

Historical Background of the Caste Census

• India’s caste census dates back to 1871-72, when the first detailed attempt was made to document caste-based information across regions such as the North-Western Provinces (NWP), Central Provinces (CP), Bengal, and Madras.
• The classifications were largely arbitrary, with superficial groupings like "Brahmins, Rajputs, Banias, and other Hindu castes" in the NWP, while the CP grouped individuals into categories like “servants and laborers” or “mendicants and devotees.” Bengal included classifications such as beggars and cooks, whereas Madras introduced terms like “mixed castes” and “outcastes.”
• W. Chichele Plowden, who authored the 1881 Census report, called the caste classification process “confusing” and suggested avoiding such an exercise in the future. However, similar complexities resurfaced during the 1931 caste census, which identified over 4,000 castes. Officials noted that caste identities varied significantly across regions, complicating the process.
• These challenges persist today. For instance, the 2011 Socio-Economic and Caste Census (SECC) identified 46.7 lakh castes and sub-castes, with over 8.2 crore reported errors. A more recent example includes the controversy surrounding the inclusion of categories like ‘hijra’ and ‘kinnar’ in the Bihar Census of 2022.

Challenges in Data Accuracy

Upward Mobility in Caste Claims
The caste reported by individuals can be influenced by the perceived prestige of certain social groups. For instance, between the 1921 and 1931 censuses, some communities shifted their reported status within the varna hierarchy. A notable example involves the Sonar community, which identified as Kshatriya or Rajput in 1921 and as Brahmin or Vaishya in 1931.

Downward Mobility in Caste Claims
In some cases, individuals or groups claim affiliation with low