Discuss the constitutional and administrative issues involved in conducting a nationwide caste census in India.

Census is a Union subject under Entry 69 of the Union List, operationalised through the Census Act, 1948 [3]. The Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs decision of 30 April 2025 to enumerate caste in Census 2027 ends a gap since 1931, but raises distinct constitutional and administrative questions [1].

Constitutional issues

• Federal competence and friction: enumeration is a Union function, yet Bihar, Telangana and Karnataka conducted their own caste "surveys", filling the vacuum and generating Centre–State contestation over delay and design [6].
• Reservation ceiling: fresh caste numbers invite demands to breach the 50% cap of Indra Sawhney (1992). The Patna High Court in Gaurav Kumar v. State of Bihar (2024) struck down Bihar's 65% quota, holding the survey did not establish the exceptional circumstances required [4].
• Empirical basis for backwardness: Articles 15(4), 16(4) and the Article 340 commission mandate require identifiable data; after the 102nd and 105th Amendments, both Union and States need a defensible basis for OBC identification and sub-categorisation.
• Privacy and equality: state-recorded caste identity must be reconciled with the constitutional goal of a caste-neutral order.

Administrative issues

• Classification complexity: caste names, sub-castes and synonyms lack a standard national list. The SECC 2011, though enumerated, was never tabulated and released for policy use [5].
• Scale and technology: Census 2027 is India's first digital enumeration, with mobile-based collection and secure data centres in a two-phase design, caste being captured in the Population Enumeration phase [1].
• Capacity and cost: the approved scheme involves a large outlay and mass training of enumerators, pre-tests and administrative readiness [2].
• Harmonising questionnaires with state survey formats to avoid conflicting counts [6].

A caste census is best seen not as an end but as an evidence base for targeted welfare. If backed by transparent methodology, timely publication and use strictly within the constitutional framework of Articles 15 and 16, it can convert social data into substantive equality — realising the Preamble's promise of justice, social and economic.