Caste census report: Amid criticism, commission members say methodology was tried and tested

A sticker pasted on the wall of a house after the Socio-Economic and Educational Survey in Bengaluru.

Amidst the dominant land-owning Veerashaiva-Lingayat and Vokkaliga communities terming the Socio-Economic and Educational Survey as “unscientific”, those involved in the survey conducted by the Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes have dismissed those claims. They say it is scientific and conducted in a transparent manner.

The Veerashaiva-Lingayat and Vokkaliga community leaders have sought a fresh survey as their population figures are far lower than what they have traditionally claimed. The Veerashaiva-Lingayat population is pegged at 66.35 lakh (11% of the State’s population) as per the survey, while they have claimed it to be between 17% and 22%.

The Vokkaliga population is around 61.58 lakh (10.29%), as against their claim to be between 13% and 15%. Leaders from both communities have disputed survey figures and called for a fresh survey. The two communities have also said sub castes classification had not been done properly, resulting in reduction in their overall numbers.

Of the projected population of about 6.35 crore in 2015 (census population figure was 6.11 crore) in Karnataka, the survey conducted by the Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes led by H. Kantharaj in 2015 covered about 5.98 crore from about 1.35 crore households in the State. The report was submitted by the K. Jayaprakash Hegde-led commission in 2024. The commission has acknowledged that about 37 lakh or about 5.83% of the population could not be covered.

Meticulous methodology

Refuting these claims, K.N. Lingappa, member of the Kantharaj Commission, said: “We have not left out any castes/sub castes. The commission advertised twice seeking feedback from communities if any had been erroneously omitted, before the survey work. Several petitions were received and requests accommodated.”

Further, he said that the entire process was conducted through government machinery in which about 1.3 lakh teachers were roped in. “The Indian Institute of Management, Bengaluru, also studied our survey and its methodology and has certified it,” he pointed out.

The left-out population could be owing to migration for livelihood or locked houses that could not be surveyed despite multiple visits, Mr. Lingappa said. “Enumerators in Bengaluru also had difficulties as gated communities did not allow them. In some houses, dogs were unleased. These were not deliberate lapses,” he added.

He also acknowledged that the enumeration work was about 85% in Bengaluru owing to administrative and logistic issues. The former member said that outside Bengaluru, enumeration coverage was 99% to 100%. “The Supreme Court has allowed up to 10% lag. Even if the left-out population is proportionately added to the respective castes, the claimed numbers of Veerashaiva-Lingayats and Vokkaligas cannot be matched,” he said,

Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H.K. Patil also pointed out that the national census also has a 3% lag, and nearly 95% population being covered reflected good work.

How castes are identified

Commission sources also said that several castes that are in 2-A category and identified with their vocation, dropped the Lingayat tag during enumeration fearing losing out on reservation. This was also reflected by Lingayat leader and Heavy Industries Minister M.B. Patil, who claimed the community figure to be over one crore. Similarly, some members of Beda Jangama, a sub-castes under Veerashaiva-Lingayats, may have not identified themselves with the community since they already have Scheduled Caste certificates, sources said. “If every community wants to inflate their population figures, then the State figures has to be increased, which then would actually make it unscientific,” he said.

Meanwhile, Mr. Hegde, who submitted the report in 2024, said that the survey was conducted under the leadership of Deputy Commissioners, and the datasheets/pro formas are still available in the DC offices that can be verified. “It was an objective survey. If some people have refused to give caste details or have hidden the caste while only providing sub caste for reservation purposes, the commission cannot be held responsible,” he said.