Finding the Rationale Behind a Caste Census
About the Author
Aritrick Das is a final-year law student at Banaras Hindu University with a passion for connecting ideas across law, economics, governance, public policy and technology.
A caste census as the name also suggests is nothing but a systematic recording of the individual castes that are present in India during a nationwide census.
The interesting thing here is that caste census is not a new concept but rather it is something which used to be carried on in the distant past as well. Peabody notes that between 1658 and 1664, the Marwar Kingdom carried out the first organized caste-based household survey in the Indian subcontinent, covering seven districts along with its capital city, Jodhpur. The survey was undertaken by Munhata Nainsi, who was serving as the Home Minister of the Marwar Kingdom at the time. Its primary objective was not to categorize society or to establish caste hierarchies, but rather to address practical issues related to taxation. By recording caste-wise household details, the administration sought to streamline revenue collection and ensure that tax liabilities were properly documented. In other words, the enumeration was an administrative exercise aimed at improving fiscal management, rather than a social or political project of classifying communities.
Caste Census During the British Era
After this, during the British colonial period, caste was systematically incorporated into India’s decadal census exercises. The primary aim was to classify the population not only by religion and occupation but also by caste, which the colonial state viewed as a crucial unit of social organization in India. The first detailed caste-based census was carried out in 1871–72 under the supervision of British administrators. Thereafter, from 1881 onwards, caste was made a regular feature of every decadal census until 1931. The 1931 census marked the last comprehensive enumeration of caste in India, documenting as many as 4,147 distinct castes. After that, while the census continued, caste enumeration was largely abandoned (except for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes after Independence to fulfil constitutional requirements for reservation) because of the sheer complexity, vast diversity of caste identities, and political concerns about reinforcing social divisions. Historians have noted that the British use of caste in the census was not merely a neutral act of data collection. By categorizing and fixing fluid community identities into rigid administrative categories, the colonial state deepened caste consciousness and, in some cases, reshaped social hierarchies. Bernard Cohn and Nicholas Dirks, for instance, argue that colonial practices like the caste census institutionalized caste as a central framework of governance, thereby giving it greater salience in modern India than it might otherwise have had.
In short: The British caste census began in 1871–72, continued regularly between 1881 and 1931, and the 1931 enumeration was the last all-India caste census.
Caste Census Afterwards
After 1931, the practice of conducting a full caste census was discontinued and remained absent for nearly a century. It is only in recent years that the debate over a caste census has resurfaced, particularly after the Bihar government released its caste survey in 2023, the first such exercise since Independence to provide detailed caste data. Several state governments, including Odisha and Maharashtra, have expressed interest in similar surveys, citing the need for accurate data to frame welfare policies. The Supreme Court has also underscored the importance of empirical evidence in reviewing reservation policies. With the last comprehensive caste enumeration dating back to 1931, the absence of updated figures has made the issue central to both governance and political strategy today. Following this, on 30 April 2025, the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA), chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, approved the inclusion of caste enumeration in the forthcoming census. While the exact schedule of the census remains uncertain, the move marks a significant policy shift. The announcement was made by Union Railway Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw, who described it as a step toward framing “equitable and targeted” policies. Union Home Minister Amit Shah hailed it as a “historic decision,” reaffirming the government’s commitment to social justice. The opposition, too, has welcomed the move. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi termed it “the first step towards deep social reform,” while pressing for a clear timeline and noting, “We have shown we can pressure the government.”
How Caste Census Can Help in Policy Making
The proponents of a caste census argue that updated data is indispensable for sound policymaking. At present, India’s welfare and reservation architecture still rests on figures last compiled in 1931, a reliance many experts describe as both outdated and inadequate. In the absence of contemporary numbers, affirmative action policies are often framed on assumptions rather than evidence, leaving room for gaps and inequities.
The very purpose of affirmative action is to ensure that benefits reach those for whom these measures were originally conceived — the communities historically disadvantaged and still struggling to catch up. Yet, without accurate numbers, policymakers are often left navigating in the dark. Crafting effective policies requires a solid quantitative foundation. After all, how can we decide who qualifies for reservations, or what share each category should receive, if we lack even a clear picture of their proportion in the population?
This is where a caste census assumes significance. Supporters contend that such an exercise would illuminate the real socio-economic landscape, revealing inequalities hidden beneath the broad labels of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes. With this clarity, welfare distribution could become more transparent, more targeted, and more just. Crucially, it would lend legitimacy to social justice claims, shifting debates from speculation to evidence. In that sense, counting caste is not merely statistical bookkeeping — it is an essential step towards making democracy more accountable and inclusive.
Yet, critics caution that a caste census is not without its perils. Counting caste, they argue, risks reinforcing the very divisions the nation has long sought to transcend. Once fresh numbers are made public, caste identities could harden, deepening social fault lines and making communities compete for recognition and greater quotas. The political class, too, may find in the data a powerful tool for vote-bank calculations, reducing the exercise to a weapon in electoral battles rather than an instrument of justice.
Beyond politics, there are formidable practical hurdles. India is home to thousands of jatis and sub-castes, and capturing them accurately is a daunting administrative challenge. The experience of the 2011 Socio-Economic and Caste Census, marred by inconsistencies, remains a cautionary tale.
Counting for Justice and Accountability
The call for a caste census rests on a simple truth: policies cannot be effective if they are built on outdated or incomplete data. Without knowing the real socio-economic profile of communities, affirmative action risks missing its target. While concerns about politicization and social divisions remain valid, they cannot outweigh the need for evidence-based policymaking. With nearly a century since the last reliable caste data, India must recognize that a caste census is not merely statistical—it is essential to advancing equity and accountability in democracy. It is important to note, however, that the success of such a massive exercise will depend not only on the political will behind it but also on the mechanisms and methods used to carry it out. With millions of households and thousands of caste identities to enumerate, accuracy and transparency will be crucial. Proper systems must be in place to ensure that the data collected is both reliable and free from manipulation, so that the exercise strengthens social justice rather than undermines it.