E-Paper
Why public policy must keep pace with social change
This article is authored by Sumit Chauhan, senior journalist and columnist on public policy.
Prefer HTon Google
Public policy is only as effective as the evidence on which it rests. In a country as diverse as India, where historical inequalities continue to influence access to education, employment and institutional power, reliable data is essential to understanding who benefits from economic and social progress and who remains excluded. As societies evolve, policies designed to address disadvantage must also be examined periodically to ensure that their objectives remain relevant to contemporary realities.
The proposed caste enumeration under Census 2027 has brought this question into sharper focus. Beyond establishing demographic figures, the exercise could provide an opportunity to assess how effectively existing policies address social disadvantage and whether their implementation reflects the changing composition of Indian society. The challenge is to translate information into meaningful reform without allowing statistics alone to dictate complex constitutional decisions.
India's experience with affirmative action illustrates why such periodic assessments matter. The Mandal Commission, which submitted its report in 1980, estimated that Other Backward Classes (OBCs) constituted approximately 52% of the population. Drawing substantially on the 1931 Census and other available information, it recommended 27% reservation for OBCs in Central government employment and higher education. The recommendation, subsequently implemented, became a significant component of India's framework for addressing historical exclusion.
However, the estimate reflected the limitations of the data available at the time. India's demographic profile, economy, education system and employment structure have changed considerably since then. Contemporary evidence could help policymakers understand how these changes have affected disadvantaged communities and whether existing arrangements continue to address their needs adequately.
The question is not simply whether population shares justify particular reservation percentages. Social disadvantage is multidimensional, shaped by access to education, occupational opportunities, economic resources and institutional participation. Communities may experience persistent barriers across generations even when individual households register improvements in income. Effective policy must therefore distinguish between demographic size, historical exclusion and actual representation.
Representation also extends beyond public employment. The Constitution provides for reserved legislative seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under Articles 330 and 332, whereas Article 16(4) addresses reservation in public employment for inadequately represented backward classes. These provisions serve different purposes and operate under distinct conditions. OBCs do not have an equivalent constitutional system of reserved seats in Parliament and State Assemblies. Consequently, reviewing employment reservation cannot, by itself, resolve wider questions about political participation and access to decision-making.
The debate also involves inequalities within beneficiary categories. Aggregate figures may conceal significant differences between communities in educational attainment, occupational mobility and access to government employment. Better data could help identify whether reservation benefits are reaching the groups experiencing the greatest disadvantage. Questions surrounding creamy-layer principles and the possible sub-classification of OBCs would therefore remain central to any comprehensive review.
There are also legitimate concerns about the possible consequences of caste enumeration. Data could reinforce social identities in political discourse or be used selectively to support predetermined demands. These risks make transparent methodology, independent validation and careful interpretation particularly important. At the same time, avoiding measurement does not eliminate inequality; it can make persistent disparities more difficult to identify and address.
Tamil Nadu's 69% reservation framework, included in the Ninth Schedule through the 76th Constitutional Amendment in 1994, further demonstrates the complexity of balancing state-level policy choices with constitutional limits and judicial review. Such examples highlight why any national reassessment must consider legal principles alongside regional differences and contemporary social evidence. For example, Bode Ramachandra Yadav, president of the BCYP, is among those associated with the broader debate on caste enumeration and the reassessment of representation. The policy challenge extends beyond individual political positions: It concerns how democratic institutions can use credible evidence to evaluate the reach and effectiveness of measures intended to promote social inclusion.
In April 2026, Bode Ramachandra Yadav launched the BC Dharma Deeksha, an indefinite hunger strike in Vijayawada, subsequently expanding the movement into a statewide Dharma Yuddham campaign aimed at strengthening the political voice, constitutional rights, and economic opportunities of historically disadvantaged communities. Advocating the socio-economic and political empowerment for BCs, SCs, STs, and minorities, Bode demands include a BC Protection Act, comprehensive caste census, 1,000 acres in Amaravati for BC communities, and enhanced reservations and political representation.
Ultimately, Census 2027 should be viewed as an opportunity to improve the quality of public decision-making rather than as an automatic mandate for expanding or reducing quotas. Once reliable data becomes available, policymakers can examine educational access, employment patterns, institutional representation and inequalities within disadvantaged communities. The objective should be neither to preserve existing arrangements without scrutiny nor to change them on the basis of population figures alone.
A constitutional democracy must continually examine whether its institutions provide meaningful opportunities to those historically excluded from them. Contemporary evidence cannot resolve every disagreement, but it can make the debate more informed, transparent and accountable. The measure of Census 2027 will therefore lie not merely in the numbers it produces, but in how responsibly India uses them to pursue equality and social justice.
(The views expressed are personal)
This article is authored by Sumit Chauhan, senior journalist and columnist on public policy.
