**Why the Demand for a "Unique Caste Code"?**
On August 30, 2026, a national OBC conference chaired by T. Chiranjeevulu and G. Kiran Kumar demanded that the central government make caste enumeration mandatory in the upcoming census and assign a unique code to each caste. The demand revives long‑standing debates over the Mandal Commission’s legacy and the political calculus of OBC reservations, highlighting tensions between data‑driven policy and concerns over communal fragmentation. Organisers warned the census would waste public funds without these measures and called for a pause until a nationwide consensus is reached, underscoring pressure from OBC constituencies representing millions.
- •Caste Census Demand Intensifies: Why OBC Leaders Want a Unique Code for Every Caste in 2026 Census
Title: Caste Census Demand Intensifies: Why OBC Leaders Want a Unique Code for Every Caste in 2026 Census
Summary Box: A national OBC conference on August 30, 2026, demanded that the Central government halt the upcoming Census unless caste enumeration is made mandatory—with a unique code for every caste—to prevent data inaccuracies. Leaders warned that the ₹12,800-crore exercise would be "scientifically unsound" without separate columns for OBCs, mirroring those for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). The demand revives debates on caste-based data’s role in welfare targeting, political representation, and the unresolved tensions between the Mandal Commission’s recommendations and the Supreme Court’s "creamy layer" exclusions.
The call for a unique alphanumeric code for each caste—akin to Aadhaar for individuals—stems from two decades of administrative chaos in caste certification. Currently, the same caste may be recorded under dozens of spelling variants, sub-castes, or regional names (e.g., "Yadav" as "Yadava," "Ahir," or "Golla" across states). Without standardization, critics argue, the Census risks underestimating OBC populations while inflating "General Category" numbers—distorting reservation policies, welfare schemes like PM-KISAN, and even electoral delimitation.
- ▸The 2011 Socio-Economic Caste Census (SECC) attempted caste enumeration but was never made public due to alleged "data inconsistencies."
- ▸Article 340 of the Constitution empowers the President to appoint a commission (like the Mandal Commission) to investigate backwardness—but does not mandate periodic caste counts.
- ▸The Indra Sawhney Judgment (1992) upheld 27% OBC reservations but excluded the "creamy layer" (economic elites), creating a need for precise caste data to implement this exclusion.
- ▸Telangana’s 2024 caste survey (conducted by the Congress government) revealed that OBCs constituted 52% of the population—far higher than the 27% reservation quota, reigniting demands for proportional quotas.
The lack of a national caste database forces states to rely on self-declaration certificates, which are prone to fraud. A unique code system, proponents argue, would link Census data to Aadhaar, enabling real-time verification for jobs, education, and schemes like Post-Matric Scholarship for OBCs.
The Legal and Political Battlefield
The demand collides with three constitutional silences:
- ▸No explicit mandate for caste enumeration: While Articles 330–332 reserve seats for SCs/STs based on Census data, OBCs have no such provision—their 27% quota flows from the 93rd Constitutional Amendment (2006), which enabled state-level reservations in education.
- ▸Supreme Court’s ambivalence: In State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas (1975), the Court held that caste cannot be the sole criterion for backwardness—yet in Indra Sawhney, it accepted caste as a proxy for social backwardness if linked to empirical data.
- ▸Centre-State tensions: States like Bihar, Odisha, and Telangana have conducted their own caste surveys, but the Centre refuses to aggregate this data nationally, citing "administrative complexities."
Did You Know? The 1931 Census—the last to record caste comprehensively—listed 4,147 castes and sub-castes in British India. Post-Independence, only SC/ST data was retained, while OBCs were lumped into a residual "General" category despite constituting ~40% of the population (per NSSO estimates).
Political stakes are sky-high:
- ▸OBC parties (RJD, SP, BSP, DMK) see the Census as a tool to pressure for higher quotas (e.g., Bihar’s demand for 65% reservations).
- ▸The BJP faces a dilemma: its OBC outreach (via schemes like PM Vishwakarma Yojana) clashes with its upper-caste vote base, which opposes expanding reservations.
- ▸General Category groups (e.g., Brahmin, Bania, Kayastha) fear shrinking opportunities if OBC quotas rise—already, 59.5% of central jobs are reserved (SC:15% + ST:7.5% + OBC:27% + EWS:10%).
The Economic and Welfare Dimensions
Caste data isn’t just about quotas—it’s about targeting ₹3.6 lakh crore in annual welfare spending. For instance:
- ▸PM-KISAN (₹6,000/year to farmers) excludes "income-tax-paying farmers"—but without caste data, OBC farmers in the "creamy layer" (e.g., those earning ₹8 lakh/year) may wrongly claim benefits.
- ▸Ayushman Bharat prioritizes SC/ST households, but OBCs—often poorer than upper castes but richer than Dalits—fall through the cracks.
- ▸NREGA wages vary by state, but OBC-dominated regions (e.g., western UP, central Maharashtra) see lower workdays allocated due to perceived "non-backward" status.
NFHS-5 (2019–21) data reveals stark gaps:
| Indicator | SC | ST | OBC | General |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty Rate | 21.2% | 25.9% | 18.3% | 8.3% |
| Literacy (15+) | 66.1% | 59.9% | 73.2% | 85.7% |
| Infant Mortality | 44.4 | 49.2 | 38.1 | 28.3 |
OBCs outnumber SCs/STs but receive fewer targeted schemes—a gap a caste Census could address.
The Way Forward: Feasibility and Roadblocks
The Technical Advisory Committee on Census has proposed three models:
- ▸Open-ended self-declaration (current plan): Risks 10,000+ caste name variants.
- ▸Pre-coded list: Requires consensus on 3,000+ castes—politically impossible.
- ▸Hybrid model: Unique codes for major castes + "Others" category—but risks undercounting.
Key hurdles:
- ▸Cost: Adding caste enumeration could double the Census budget (from ₹12,800 crore).
- ▸Privacy concerns: Linking caste to Aadhaar may violate Personal Data Protection Act 2023 safeguards.
- ▸Backlash: Upper castes may challenge the Census in court under Article 14 (equality).
Potential solutions:
- ▸Pilot in 2–3 states (e.g., Bihar + Telangana) to test the unique code system.
- ▸Use AI to standardize spellings (e.g., mapping "Kurmi" and "Kurmi-Kshatriya").
- ▸Legislative backup: Amend the Census Act 1948 to explicitly include caste—currently, it only mandates age, sex, marital status, and occupation.
CATEGORY: society TAGS: caste-census, obc-reservation, mandal-commission, social-justice, welfare-schemes, indra-sawhney-judgment, census-2026, backward-classes SOURCE: The Hindu — https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/obc-leaders-demand-caste-enumeration-in-census/article67254321.ece
Tags
Concepts Mentioned
93rd Constitutional Amendment (2006)
The 93rd Constitutional Amendment Act, passed in 2006, inserted Article 45A into the Indian Constitution, mandating free and compulsory education for children aged six to fourteen. It gave constitutional status to the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, making education a fundamental right. The amendment led to the launch of the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan programme.
Post-Matric Scholarship for OBCs
The Post‑Matric Scholarship for OBCs is a centrally funded programme that offers financial assistance to students belonging to Other Backward Classes after they complete class 10. It aims to improve enrolment and reduce dropout rates by covering tuition, books, and living expenses. For example, a postgraduate student can receive up to ₹5,000 per month under the scheme.
Indra Sawhney Judgment (1992)
The *Indra Sawhney Judgment (1992)* is a landmark Supreme Court ruling that upheld the 27% reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in government jobs while capping total quotas at 50%. It reinforced the principle of *creamy layer* exclusion to ensure benefits reach the most disadvantaged. For example, it struck down the Mandal Commission’s initial 27% recommendation until socioeconomic criteria were refined.
PM-Kisan
PM‑Kisan is a central government scheme launched in 2019 that provides direct cash transfers of up to ₹6,000 per year to small and marginal farmer families. It aims to alleviate agrarian distress and boost rural purchasing power. As of 2023, more than 12 crore farmer households have benefited, receiving the first installment in March 2020.
Mandal Commission
It was a government commission set up in 1979 to identify socially and educationally backward classes and recommend reservation quotas. Its recommendations led to a 27 % reservation for Other Backward Classes in central government jobs and higher‑education institutions, implemented in 1990.
Scheduled Tribes
Scheduled Tribes are indigenous communities in India listed in the Constitution as historically disadvantaged groups. They receive affirmative‑action benefits, including reserved seats in legislatures and educational institutions, to promote social and economic inclusion. The Bhil tribe of central India, with over 10 million members, is one of the largest Scheduled Tribes.
National Commission for Scheduled Castes
The National Commission for Scheduled Castes is a constitutional body that safeguards SC rights. It matters for UPSC as a key institution for social justice. Established in 2004, it investigates SC-related issues.
Log in to like, comment, and join the discussion.