The Supreme Court of India refused to entertain a PIL seeking exclusion of caste enumeration from the 2027 census, observing that decisions regarding caste-based census operations fall within the government’s policy domain and do not warrant judicial interference by the Court.
The Supreme Court of India has refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking exclusion of caste enumeration from the upcoming 2027 national census, observing that the issue falls within the policy domain of the government.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi held that the Court had no reason to interfere in a matter involving governmental policy decisions concerning census operations.
During the hearing, the Chief Justice remarked that the decision regarding whether the census should include caste-based data collection was for the government to decide.
The CJI remarked,
“Whether census should be caste or not caste based is a policy decision. Government has to know how many are backward class etc,”
Dismissing the petition, the Bench observed, “This is policy matter. No reason to intervene. Dismissed.”
The 2027 Census is expected to be one of the most significant census exercises conducted in India. It will reportedly be the country’s first fully digital census and also the first large-scale caste enumeration exercise since 1931. The proposed caste census has generated extensive political, legal and social debate across the country, leading to several petitions being filed before the Supreme Court concerning different aspects of the process.
Recently, the Supreme Court had dismissed another PIL seeking to stop the caste census exercise and had strongly criticised the language used by the petitioner in the plea.
Chief Justice Surya Kant had remarked during the hearing,
“Aapne petition me badtameezi ki bhasha likhi hai. Aapne kisse apna petition likhwaya hai, Aap kahan se aisi bhasha likhte ho petition mei.”
Earlier as well, the Supreme Court had refused to entertain a separate PIL challenging the proposed procedure for recording, classifying and verifying caste data in the upcoming census exercise.
That petition had been filed by academician Aakash Goel, who sought directions to the Union government to place in the public domain a transparent questionnaire explaining how caste details of citizens would be recorded, classified and verified during the census process.
While hearing that matter, the Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi had acknowledged the petitioner’s concern that there was “no pre-determined data” publicly available to explain the identification and classification process relating to caste information.
However, the Court declined to interfere with the administrative mechanism adopted for the census exercise.
The Bench had observed,
“The census exercise is regulated under the Census Act, 1948 and the Census Rules, 1990 framed thereunder, which empower the respondent authorities to determine the particulars and the manner of census operations,”
The Court also stated that there was no reason to doubt that the authorities conducting the census, along with domain experts assisting them, would evolve a sufficiently robust mechanism to prevent the kind of errors apprehended by the petitioner.
At the same time, the Bench noted that the petitioner had raised certain relevant concerns through representations addressed to the Registrar General of Census Operations and the Director General.
The Chief Justice had noted,
“We find that the petitioner has raised some relevant issues through representations addressed to the Registrar General of Census Operations and the Director General as well,”
The Court eventually disposed of that petition while requesting the competent authorities to consider the suggestions and concerns raised by the petitioner in his legal notice and writ petition, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the proposed census methodology.
The Supreme Court’s repeated refusal to interfere in matters concerning caste enumeration indicates its consistent view that questions relating to census operations, data collection and demographic classification primarily fall within the executive and policy-making domain of the government rather than judicial adjudication at this stage.
Case Title: Sudhakar Gummula vs. Union of India.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE