GENUS, LXII (No.

2), 119-134
119
RAM B. BHAGAT

Census and caste enumeration:
British legacy and contemporary practice in India



1. INTRODUCTION

The discipline of demography is not accustomed to view census as
having an interface with society and power. For demographers, census is a
scientific exercise and their role is confined to examining the nature of
census data and its interpretation. However, scholars of history, political
science and anthropology have tried to look at census very differently from
the way in which demographers usually did. In recent years, it has been a
subject of great interest with the proposition that census has not only counted
people and communities, but in the process of counting, it has been involved
in creating communities or fundamentally altering the traits of existing
communities (Cohen, 1987).
Census develops a non-overlapping scheme of classification, and each
person has a definite place in predefined categories. If a person does not fall
in any of them, a category of other is usually added. However, census does
not work in vacuum, but reflects the perception of those who are involved in
the census exercise right from the inclusion of a question in the census to
defining the categories. The political process also influences the introduction
of new categories and their counting in census as new politicized groups
demand to be enumerated to justify their share in power. Seen from this
perspective, census categories are not neutral, but are politically constructed
and finally adopted.
While it is true that census mirrors the political processes, at the same
time it has also some independent effects on the construction of ethnic and
social groups as well. The specific definition of ethnic, racial, social and
linguistic groups adopted by the census on the advice of experts, and also the
recognition of one group while overlooking others, have serious implications
on the formation of ethnic identities. Census can also gerrymander the
administrative boundaries creating majority and minority groups (Arel,
2002: 823-24; Bhagat, 2001: 4354). In countries like the US, Canada, the
post-Soviet states, Great Britain, Brazil and India, census has been engaged
in the categorization and enumeration of race, ethnicity and nationalities
which have been hotly debated and contested in recent years (Nobles, 2000;
Prewitt, 2001; Arel, 2002; Kertzer and Arel, 2002; Bhagat, 2003). In Great
RAM B. BHAGAT
120
Britain and the US, racial and ethnic data are also intended to work as a tool
for immigration control and for shaping the immigration policies of these
countries (Massey, 1995; Bhagat, 2003). In France, the classification of the
immigrant population based on their origin such as place of birth or mother
tongue raised several objections. It is said that these criteria by definition are
fixed and do not reflect the dynamic nature of the immigrant population and
their change over time. Instead, it would be appropriate if individuals of the
immigrant population were classified according to their membership in the
social network which shapes their behaviour (A. Blum quoted in Leridon,
1999:190).
India is a country of immense religious, ethnic and cultural diversity
evolving over the last five millennia. But, the boundaries between different
communities had not always been clear in the past. This prompted scholars
to characterize Indians belonging to fuzzy communities (Das, 1994: 8;
Kaviraj, 1993: 20). Several scholars also argued that modern politicized
communities in India found their definite geographical and social boundaries
through census enumeration initiated during British rule (Jones, 1981; Cohn,
1987; Anderson, 1991; Kaviraj, 1993; Appaduarai, 1993). Further, census
was viewed as an instrument of domination along with map and museum
during colonial rule (Anderson, 1991:163).
Caste is the most important identity of Indian people together with
religion. The question on religion in the census has been studied in detail
elsewhere (Jones, 1981; Bhagat, 2001). But the caste question in Indian
censuses has not been given adequate treatment in demographic literature. It
is generally believed that caste is a status based on social origin in the Hindu
society, ranging from Brahmins (priestly castes) at the top, followed by
Kshatriya (warrior castes), Vaishyas (trading castes) and Shudras (labouring
castes) at the bottom of the social ladder. However, in reality, within each of
the Varna category there existed numerous castes and sub-castes whose
names were not similar in the different parts of India and their position in
social hierarchy was also not clear.
According to Dirk the way British officials understood caste reflected
in the census categorization and enumeration, and it affected the way caste
was practiced. This led to some quite innovative relations between Jatis
(castes) all over India (Dirk, 2001:10). Contrary to this proposition, some
researchers also believe that it is not correct to say that colonialism created
the religious and caste categories in India; they were already present before
the arrival of the British, but it did make a difference in the formation of
communal and caste identities in the country (Gupta, 2004).
Although complete caste enumeration was discontinued in independent
India, there was a strong debate to include caste in the 2001 census in light
CENSUS AND CASTE ENUMERATION: BRITISH LEGACY AND PRACTICE IN INDIA
121
of the Government of India granting reservation of jobs to the Other
Backward Classes (OBCs) in the early 1990s (Pinto, 1998; Deshpande and
Sunder, 1998). This new situation warranted examining the caste question
afresh in censuses of both British and independent India.
Thus the present paper attempts to study the changing enumeration of
caste and its categorisation in Indian censuses and also the engagement of
the state in the reconstruction of caste identities in the country. It
demonstrates how census follows the political processes of caste
categorisation and counts them accordingly. It further shows that the
dilemma to include caste in 2001 census was politically constituted.


2. CENSUS AND CASTE: THE BRITISH EXPERIMENT

There were several reasons why the British Government started census
1

in India. From an administrative point of view, clear knowledge of the
composition of Indian society was necessary to exert control and extract
revenue. During this time, a new classificatory trend in the European
intellectual tradition was also emerging which motivated the British
Government to develop a taxonomy based on their perception of Indian
societies primarily belonging to primordial categories (Bandyopadhyay,
1992:26).
Since the very first census of 1872
2
the colonial Government
incorporated caste and religious categories in the enumeration of the Indian
population. Along with caste, the census also incorporated the categories of
tribe and race, but the distinction between them was often obscure. For
example Jats and Rajputs two important castes of northern India were
also mentioned as tribes in the 1891 census (Baines, 1893). However, as of
1901, the category of tribe was incorporated for the first time in the census

1
Guha (2003) argues that census enumeration was not a novel practice adopted by the British,
but was equally practiced in earlier times particularly in the Moghul period. But the fact
remains that the earlier enumerations were very much confined to the purposes of land
revenue and taxation and also geographically very much limited. In contrast to this, the
colonial census was interested in anthropological knowledge and was carried out covering
most parts of the country.
2
It was decided by the British Government as early as in 1856 to hold census in 1861 in
India. But the census could not be held due to mutiny in 1857. In 1865, the Government of
India and the Home Government again had agreed upon the principle that a general
population census would be taken in 1871. But, the years 1867-72 were actually spent in
census taking. This series of census is in fact known as the Census of 1872, which was neither
a synchronous census nor covered the entire territory controlled by the British (Srivastava,
1972: 9).
RAM B. BHAGAT
122
schedule along with race and caste. The category of race or tribe was applied
to religious groups not belonging to the Hindu and Jain religions, whereas
the category of caste was applied only to Hindus until 1891, and since the
1901 census Jains were also added (see Table 1). From the census side, no
attempt had been made to define caste, race or tribe. For instance, the Census
Commissioner of the 1931 census, J.H. Hutton, clarified that
the term caste needs no definition in India; tribe was provided to cover the
many communities still organized on the basis in whose case the tribe has not
become a caste; it was likewise determinate enough, and no attempt was
made to define the term race which was generally used so loosely as almost
to defy any definition.

However, the category of race was primarily included to obtain a
return of Indians to whom the terms like caste and tribe are inapplicable
(Hutton, 1931:425).
Even though no attempt was made to define the categories like caste,
tribe and race
3
, still the Indian population was classified as far as possible
into mutually exclusive groups. In respect to caste, it was generally
overlooked that caste had been a dynamic and mobile category of Indian
society. It is evident in the reports of none other than the census
commissioners themselves. J.H. Hutton noted in 1931 census report that,
a caste which had applied in one province to be called Brahman (priestly
caste) asked in another to be called Rajput (warrior caste) and there are
several instances at this census of castes claiming to be Brahman who
claimed to be Rajputs ten years ago.

These are not the casual remarks of a distinguished census
commissioner but very important to understand that caste identity has not
been a fixed entity in Indian history. This is further buttressed when E. A.
Gait, the Census Commissioner of 1911 census wrote about the dynamics of
caste as follows:
apparently caste looked fixed and immutable category, but this is by no
means the case. In fact, new castes come up as necessity arises and old
disappears. The process of change is slow and imperceptible, like the
movement of the hour hand of a watch, but it is nevertheless always going
on. When one section of a caste develops peculiarities of any kind a
different occupation, habitat or social practice, or more rarely, a different

3
The question on religion, caste and race was introduced in the census of colonial India by
the British Government in sharp contrast to the census taking in Great Britain where a
question on ethnicity was introduced only in the 1991 census and the question on religion was
kept apart from enumeration until the 2001 census (Peach, 2000; Bhagat, 2001).
CENSUS AND CASTE ENUMERATION: BRITISH LEGACY AND PRACTICE IN INDIA
123

Table 1 Caste and related categories in Indian censuses, 1872 to 1951


Census Caste and related categories Remark


1872 Caste or Class
i) Castes of Hindus were recorded.
ii) The ethnic categories of Muslims such as
Syed, Sheikh, Pathan and Moghul were
referred to as classes.
1881
Caste if Hindus; sect if of
other religion
i) Castes and sub-castes of Hindus were
ascertained. For Muslims their main sects like
Shia, Sunni , Fararis and Wahbis were
ascertained.
ii) Christians were divided into Roman
Catholics, Presbyterians, Baptists,
Wesleyans; the Armenians as belonging to
the Greek or Syrian rite or if not belonging to
any of these denominations, they were put
under the heading of others.
1891 Caste or Race
i) Castes and sub-castes of Hindus were asked;
ii) Races such as Burman, Korean, Talaing and
European, Eurasian were recorded.
1901
Caste of Hindus and Jains;
Tribes or Race of Others
i) Caste of Hindus and Jains were recorded.
ii) For Christians and Muslims, their race or
caste was accepted as given by them.
1911
Caste of Hindus and Jains;
Tribes or Race of Others
i) Caste of Hindus and Jains were recorded.
ii) For Christians and Muslims, their race or
caste was accepted as given by them.
1921 Caste, Tribe or Race
i) Caste or tribe of Hindus, Muslims, Jains,
Sikhs were recorded;
ii) Race of Christians, Buddhists and Parsis were
recorded.
1931 Caste, Tribe or Race
i) Caste and sub-castes, or tribe was recorded
for each person.
ii) For foreigners, race was recorded as Anglo-
Indian, Canadian, Goanese, Turkish etc.
1941 Caste, Tribe or Race
i) Caste, tribe or race was recorded for every
person.
ii) Scheduled castes and Scheduled tribes were
also identified as Scheduled Castes Order
1936.
iii) For non-Indians, the race or nationality like
French or Portuguese was entered.

Source: Srivastava S.C., 1972, 161-164.

religious cult the tendency is for it to regard itself and to be regarded by the
rest of the caste, as something different. The feeling goes stronger with time,
until at last it, or the main body of the caste, withdraws from the marriage
league. The result is a new sub-caste, and often, in the end, a new caste
(Gait, 1913: 371).
RAM B. BHAGAT
124
The above statement shows that caste has not been a fixed category
historically. On the other hand, it is true that both internal and external forces
had shaped caste statuses. The forces shaping caste status lay in the way
castes had perceived and defined themselves in relation to other castes
(Gupta, 2004). As each caste was nestled into endless number of sub-castes,
their boundaries were very internal and were liable to change over time and
space
4
. It is for this reason that scholars have observed that caste boundaries
remained fluid, fuzzy and dynamic historically in Indian society (Kaviraj,
1993; Bandyopdhyay, 1992; Das, 1994; Dirk, 2001). In many instances, a
caste or a sub-caste had multiplied through fission or merged through a
fusion with other castes or sub-castes. For example, the dominant
agricultural castes of south India such as Kamma and Reddy are of recent
origin having been formed mainly for political reasons through the
coalescence of numerous sub-castes in the early 20
th
century (Washbrook,
1975 quoted in Upadhya, 1997: 175).
The decennial census during British India, on the other hand, not only
updated the population figures, but also gave them specific names/labels and
ranks and tried to standardize and anchor castes in time and space. In doing
so, British understanding of caste was primarily based on their reading of
oriental literature as well as their reliance on Brahmin scholars who
generally subscribed to the Varna view of caste hierarchy
5
. Often, it did not
present the way caste was actually organised in different parts of India, and
presented a view of the caste system based on the perception of outsiders and
the local elite (Bandyopadhyay, 1992).
At the social level, many people thought that the object of the census
was to fix the relative social positions of the different social classes and to
deal with questions of social superiority. As a result many lower caste people
placed themselves in higher castes in order to raise their social status. In the
census, the underprivileged found an opportunity to express their aspiration
and if possible to acquire a new identity through enumeration (Ghurye,
1924: 169; Ahmed, 1981: 116). This led to the formation of several caste
associations adopting honorific caste names overnight and claiming descent
from higher castes like Brahmin and Rajputs etc. (Padmanabha, 1978). In
many places, several caste groups petitioned the census officials and

4
The ramification of caste was also observed based on their geographical location. For
example, Brahmans could be Sariyupari (across the river Sarju in north India) or Daksini
Brahaman (a Brahmin from south India) (Guha, 2003:157).
5
The Census officials appointed scholars of Hindu scriptures. They had been asked to prepare
the list of all castes and their position in ritual hierarchy in the Bengal Presidency. Any doubt
or dispute regarding the origin and status of a particular caste was resolved by reference to
this list (Cohn, 1987; Bandyopadhyay, 1992).
CENSUS AND CASTE ENUMERATION: BRITISH LEGACY AND PRACTICE IN INDIA
125
demanded to be included in a different category from those on the census
and their claims were also accepted. In this way, census induced people to
organise and represent their interests in politics in terms of caste identities
(Sheth, 1999). On the other hand, a number of castes were not content with
the way they were entered and grouped in the census and there was
widespread resentment over this (Cohn, 1987). For example in Bengal,
Chandala was traditionally used as a generic term to identify all the low
caste people, but this name was entered as a caste in the census. The people
who were numerated as Chandala protested and changed their name to the
respectable name of Namasudra (Bandyopadhyay, 1997). We also find that
census helped to create new castes such as Yadava and Vishwakarma or
Jangida by merging the diverse castes spread over different geographical
areas but with a common occupation. For example, Yadava was created by
combining Ahirs, Goalas, Gopis, Idaiyans and some other castes of milkmen
and graziers. Similarly, several artisan castes such as carpenters, smiths and
goldsmiths were grouped under the common denomination of Vishwakarma
or Jangida (J.H. Hutton, 1931:431).
It is worthwhile to note that caste has been an endogamous group of
Indian society, and the members of different castes speak a variety of
dialects and languages depending upon the territory where they are found.
However, in the process of identifying a caste, the marriage boundary and
the linguistic status of a caste also entered into the enumeration. For
example, enumerators were required to ascertain in the case of Hindus the
caste of the various groups, circles or divisions outside of which a man
cannot marry. In case of any doubt about this rule, a clarification had been
provided to the enumerators as follows:
For instance a Rashi Brahman could marry outside of the sub-caste Rashi
but he could marry outside of the larger group Brahman and this larger group
was what was recorded as his caste where this rule was doubtful. In case of
provincial or local designation such as Bengali, Uriya and Gorkhali, the name
of caste was entered like Bengali-Kaibartta, Uriya-Khandhit. In the case of
Musalmans and Christians the statement regarding their race or caste was
accepted as given by the respondent (Srivastava, 1972:163).

The above statement shows how a caste was renamed depending upon
their linguistic status such as Bengali, Uriya (Oriya) and Gorkhali etc.
In addition to the identification and enumeration of caste, they were
also grouped into broad homogeneous and mutually exclusive categories.
While grouping the castes, the ritual hierarchy in terms of Varna was kept in
the mind of census officials in determining caste status in social hierarchy. In
the 1881 census, the Census Commissioner, W.C. Plowden decided to group
the various castes into the five categories, namely Brahmans, Rajputs, Castes
RAM B. BHAGAT
126
of Good Social Position, Inferior Castes and Non-Hindus or Aboriginal
Castes (Cohn, 1987). The 1921 census made an attempt to identify the
depressed classes. However, the term of depressed classes did not find
favour in the 1931 census and was replaced by exterior castes (Hutton,
1931). In any case, it is important to note that such categorization in the
census was followed by the Scheduled Caste Order of 1936 that officially
recognized the listing of castes in every province of India (Bandyopadhyay,
1997: 33).
In a nutshell we find that through colonial census, caste existing at the
perceived level of relationship was objectified, entered into the official
document and their social and geographical boundaries were well identified
through enumeration. The enumeration of castes and their ethnographic
descriptions also highlighted how the social and economic advantages
accrued to some castes and not to others, which led to demands from many
castes for special recognition by the state in order to receive educational and
occupational benefits as well as political representation. It generated new
consciousness among caste groups, and the democratic process in
postcolonial India brought them into the political arena of electoral politics.


3. CENSUS AND CASTE: THE POST-INDEPENDENCE PRACTICE

3.1 Scheduled category and religious identity

In independent India, Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes
(STs) were accepted as new official social categories under the provision of
article 341 of the Indian Constitution. According to this article, the President
of India, after consultation with the Governor of a State/Union Territory
(UT), may declare castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes,
races of tribes as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes belonging to that
State or UT. The official listing of castes and tribes was justified on the
grounds that these social groups have remained underprivileged and
discriminated by the higher castes. It was therefore essential for the state to
protect their interest. Accordingly, the Govt. of India as well State
Governments granted them reservation of jobs and other benefits and
privileges. It is believed that the state granting privileges to the SCs and STs
has strengthened caste identities. On the other hand, democratic politics
based on number gave them a new lease on life, as they constitute nearly
one-fourth of Indias population (Randeria, 2001).
In order to assess the progress and achievement of Government policies
in raising the socio-economic status of SCs and STs, it was essential for the
CENSUS AND CASTE ENUMERATION: BRITISH LEGACY AND PRACTICE IN INDIA
127
census to collect data on their demographic and socio-economic conditions.
But the Govt. did not allow the census to enumerate all castes and sub-castes
as practiced in British India.

Table 2 Caste/Tribe Categories in Indian censuses, 1951 to 2001


Census Caste and related categories Remark


1951 Special Group
i) Special groups are Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes as per the Constitution
Order 1950 and 1951.
ii) Scheduled Caste could belong to only Hindu
or Sikh religion
iii) Scheduled Tribe could belong to any religion
1961
Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe
i) List of the caste and tribes belonging to this
group as declared by the President of India
ii) Scheduled Caste could belong to only Hindu
or Sikh religion
iii) Scheduled Tribe could belong to any religion
1971 to
1981
Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe
i) List of the caste and tribes belonging to this
group as declared by the President of India
ii) Scheduled Caste could belong to only Hindu
or Sikh religion
iii) Scheduled Tribe could belong to any religion
1991
Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe
i) List of the caste and tribes belonging to this
group as declared by the President of India
ii) Scheduled Caste could belong to only Hindu,
Sikh and Buddhist religion
iii) Scheduled Tribe could belong to any religion
2001
Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe
i) List of the caste and tribes belonging to this
group as declared by the President of India
ii) Scheduled Caste could belong to only Hindu,
Sikh and Buddhist religion
iii) Scheduled Tribe could belong to any religion

Sources: Srivastava S.C., 1972, pp. 161-164; Census of India, 1991;
http:// www.censusindia.net

Perhaps the Government was wary of the resurgence of more than
4000
6
caste and sub-caste identities demolishing the secular and democratic
foundation of independent India, and has ceased the enumeration of caste

6
The number of castes identified in the 1901 census was 1646, which increased to 4147 in the
1931 census the last census on caste in India. However, the total number of castes also
includes over 300 castes whose religion was recorded as Christian and over 500 who were
recorded as Muslims. The Anthropological Survey of India launched the Peoples of India
Project (under the leadership of K.S. Singh), which was completed in the 1990s. According to
this study there were 4635 castes or communities in India (Mazumdar et al., n.d.).
RAM B. BHAGAT
128
since the 1951 census except the enumeration of scheduled castes and
scheduled tribes.
While the British legacy of caste enumeration was discontinued in the
census, religious classification and their enumeration continued to be the
major preoccupation of Indian censuses even after the disappearance of
colonialism. In the neighbouring countries of Pakistan and Bangladesh also,
census continued to classify the population according to religion. In the
Bangladesh census, religious categories include Islam, Hindu, Buddhist,
Christian and Others, and no caste categories were identified among Hindu
Populations (Bangladesh Census Bureau, 1993). In the Pakistani census,
religious categories like Muslims, Christians, Hindus (Jati), Scheduled
Caste, Qadiani and Others are provided. Hindus (non-SCs) and SCs are
enumerated separately, and a religious sect named Qadiani (a Muslim sect)
is also enumerated (Pakistan Census Organization, 1998).
It is thus startling to find that the religious classification of the
population in South Asian countries is in marked contrast to the census
practices in Southeast Asian countries, where religious identity gradually
disappeared as a primary census classification in the post colonial period. On
the other hand, the racial and ethnic categories like Malaysian, Chinese,
Javanese, Indian and Other acquired a more prominent place in the census
classification (Anderson, 1991: 164-165).
In the censuses of independent India, religion is justified for inclusion
on the grounds that the official categorization of SCs is crucially linked with
the religious status of a person (see Table 2). At present as per Presidential
order only Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhist can be enumerated as a SC. It is
worthwhile to mention that notwithstanding the governments constitutional
commitment to secular principles, religion is not only enumerated, but
paradoxically only selective demographic data on the size and growth of
religious populations
7
were published until the 2001 census. This created
enough misconception about the role of religion in population growth and
consequently fed into the charged communal situation in the country
(Bhagat, 2001).
Furthermore, the freedom to profess religion is also restricted in the
case of SCs. This is evident when during census enumeration only those SCs
belonging to the religion of Hinduism, Sikh and Buddhism are recognised
(see Table 2). The recognition of SCs based on religious identity is premised
on the belief that caste subjugation is ingrained in the practice of some
religions, while not in others. This has led to the denial of SC status to the

7
Census published data by religion pertaining to the size, growth and also fertility levels, but
the level of education or occupational characteristics of religious groups were not published
until the 2001 census (Bhagat, 2001).
CENSUS AND CASTE ENUMERATION: BRITISH LEGACY AND PRACTICE IN INDIA
129
low caste converts who embraced Christianity
8
, Islam, and other religions in
the past. It is possible that, if SCs are recognized across all religious groups,
this is likely to weaken religious identity in the country. It seems that the
Indian state is inherently disposed to the religious construction through
census and wherever this is being disrupted by the resurgence of caste
identities, the state can choose to thwart and mould its citizen along religious
lines. This was evident on the eve of the 2001 census.
Before the 2001 Census began, there was an argument to include
enumeration of all castes in the census. This was deemed necessary in order
to reserve jobs granted to the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) also in the
early 1990s on the recommendation of the Mandal Commision, which
further suggested monitoring the progress of OBCs after 20 years (Ramaiah
1992). As a result, census information on OBCs similar to that of the SCs
and STs was also required. But, this argument was not favoured by the
Central Government and the proposal to enumerate all castes was turned
down by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which controls the census
organisation (Krishnakumar, 2000).
While it is true that enumeration of all castes would be difficult due to
the complexities in classifying them and due to the fact that castes
themselves have changed in several traditional attributes over time, however,
in the absence of recent data, the 1931 census information on castes
continues to be the only source on the size and proportion of OBCs in the
country. Also, the state has established the National Commission for
Backward Classes, under the National Commission for Backward Classes
Act 1993, which is entrusted with the task of revising the Backward Classes
list periodically for the deletion of castes that have ceased to be backward
classes or for inclusion of new castes in the list of backward classes. For this
purpose, the Commission requires the population size of such castes, their
proportion in the district and state populations. This creates an extreme
necessity for caste census in the country. But, whether caste will be included
or not is a contentious issue among academia and administrators. However,
the fate of caste in census will be decided by those who hold power in the
future (Vijayanunni, 1999).
Thus, we find that in independent India religion combined with official
categories of SCs and STs gives eight broad categories of ethnic
classification, namely: Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists,
SCs and STs. According to the census, an individual who does not fall in any

8
Recently the Social Justice Minister, Government of India, has clarified in the Lok Sabha,
quoting the Registrar General of India, that any move to include Christians among the SCs
would infer that India will be imposing the caste system among Christians (Times of India,
National Daily, December 20, 2003).
RAM B. BHAGAT
130
of the eight categories has an opportunity to be enumerated in the category
called Other. It seems that modern India has embarked upon the project of
creating broader, more homogeneous communities in contrast to the British
practice of revealing enormous differentiations and differences.

3.2 Enumeration dilemmas

The enumeration of SCs and STs in the census is done strictly
according to the list supplied to the enumerators. The list varies from one
State/UT to another. If a person claims to be a SC or ST, but his or her caste
or tribe name does not figure in the list, he or she will not be recorded as a
SC and ST as per census instructions (Census of India, 1971). The list is
treated as sacrosanct and there is no role of how communities perceive
themselves. However, before the 1971 census, enumerators were also
supplied with a set of synonyms, local and generic names so that a person
reporting his caste or tribe by any synonym or generic name was treated as
SC or ST irrespective of whether such synonym or generic name found a
place in the notified list. This practice of enumerating SCs and STs was
discontinued following a Supreme Court judgment. As a result, the
enumerators were instructed to strictly follow the list supplied to them by the
census.
It is a well known fact that the names of castes vary widely depending
on the dialect and language spoken in the area. Even in a homogenous
linguistic area, there is a possibility of variation in the way the name of a
caste is pronounced and written. The official construction of SC or ST
ignores this important fact. On the other hand, it warrants that SC and ST
communities should know the official names of their castes or tribal
denominations and report them accordingly. As such, the official
standardization of caste names provides a new symbol under which to unite
the splinter groups of a caste known by different local variants and with
differing cultural practices so that they come under one official caste name
given by the state.
SCs mostly belong to the lowest social rung of caste hierarchy known
as Shudras with whom inter-dining was not permitted historically and who
were not allowed to worship in Hindu temples in the past. Also, the members
of higher castes usually kept a distance from them in day-to-day activities. In
order to boost their morale, Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of the Nation,
called them Harijan (people of God). It is worthwhile to mention that a clear
instruction to the enumerators is given that they should not write the term
Harijan or Achhut (an untouchable) even if a person reports this at the
time of census (Census of India, 1991).
CENSUS AND CASTE ENUMERATION: BRITISH LEGACY AND PRACTICE IN INDIA
131
It is beyond doubt that the majority of the SCs and STs are still poor
and that they work as landless agricultural labourers in rural areas.
According to the 2001 census, the percentage of landless agricultural
labourers was nearly double compared to the non-scheduled caste population
(Census of India, 2001). Being poor they often have to migrate to urban
areas in search of employment. However, the migration of SCs and STs not
only makes enumeration difficult but also forfeits their scheduled status if
they migrate to states of India other than their state of origin. This is due to
the fact that the list of SCs and STs is applicable only in the state where
these communities traditionally live. Thus we find that in the 2001 census
even a former President of India was not counted as SC because he had
migrated from the state of Kerala to the National Capital Territory of Delhi
(Pinto, 2001). This is because the list of SCs pertaining to the National
Capital Territory of Delhi did not contain the name of the caste to which the
former President belonged. This raised an important issue about the way
census counted SCs and STs, and points to a paradox of state granting
privileges to uplift them on the one hand, and dissolving their special status
on the other through the instrument of census enumeration.


4. CONCLUSION

It may be wrong to assume that caste has been a static category of
Indian society. It has changed due to internal as well as external forces
unleashed by the state power. Census is one such process which tried to
provide neat boundaries among the castes through classification. Census
during the British period officially demarcated the caste grids, provided
fixed labels, and grouped them anchored to time and space. In this process,
caste categories were officially standardized, necessitated by the exigencies
of enumeration which renewed their identity by providing information on
geographical coverage and demographic strength, and encouraged them to
the democratic politics of mobilization based on new forms of caste
categories and consciousness.
In independent India, census is not comfortable with caste enumeration.
It has discontinued the British practice, but retained the enumeration of
historically deprived and discriminated castes. The demand for a complete
caste enumeration, following the Indian Government granting job
reservations to OBCs in the early 1990s and consequently the need for socio-
demographic information for identifying OBCs, has not been acceded to by
the State. In India, from the point of view of access to state power, caste and
religion have been two competing identities in the political sphere. Whether
RAM B. BHAGAT
132
caste will be incorporated in the census much depends upon its trade off with
religion in the processes of political mobilization. The different political
parties in India have been changing their strategies accordingly. But, the fact
remains that if caste identity finds precedence it is likely to weaken religious
identity. A full-scale caste census contains this potential. It is therefore
observed that
if caste returns as a critical enumerative category for the Indian state in the
new millennium, it both carries the enormous contradictions of this legacy
and points to new possibilities for social transformation and political
citizenship. Caste, in these terms, is neither tragedy nor farce, but history
itself (Dirks, 2001:302).



References

AHMED R. (1981), The Bengal Muslims 1871-1906: A Quest for Identity,
Delhi, Oxford University Press, Delhi.
AREL D. (2002),Demography and politics in the first post-Soviet censuses:
mistrusted state, contested identities, Population-E, 57(6), 801-828.
ANDERSON B. (1991), Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and
Spread of Nationalism, Revised Edition, London, Verso.
APPADURAI A. (1993), Number in the colonial imagination, in VAN DER
VEER P., BRECKENRIDGE C. (eds.), Orientalism and the Post-colonial
Predicament, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 314-339.
BAINES U.A. (1893), Census of India 1891: A General Report, London, India
Office, (Reprinted by Manas Publications, 1985, Delhi).
BANDYOPADHYAY, S. (1992), Construction of social categories: the role of
the colonial census, in SINGH K.S. (ed.), Ethnicity, Caste and People,
Proceedings of the Indo-Soviet Seminars Held in Calcutta and
Leningrad in 1990, Organised by Anthropological Survey of India, New
Delhi and Institute of Ethnography, Moscow, Manohar, Delhi, 26-36.
BANDYOPADHYAY S. (1997), Caste, Protest and Identity in Colonial India:
The Namasudras of Bengal, 1872-1097, London, Curzon Press.
BANGLADESH CENSUS BUREAU OF STATISTICS (1993), Bangladesh
Population Census 1991, Vol. 2, Union Statistics, December, 1-11,
http://www.bbsgov.org/ana_vol.2 accessed on August 18, 2005.
BHAGAT R.B. (2001), Census and the construction of communalism in
India, Economic and Political Weekly, November, 4352-4355.
BHAGAT R.B. (2003), Role of census in racial and ethnic construction: US,
British and Indian censuses, Economic and Political Weekly, February
22, 686-691.
CENSUS AND CASTE ENUMERATION: BRITISH LEGACY AND PRACTICE IN INDIA
133
CENSUS OF INDIA (1971), Special Tables for Scheduled Castes, Series 1,
India, Part V-A (I), New Delhi, Registrar General and Census
Commissioner.
CENSUS OF INDIA (1991), Primary Census Abstracts: Scheduled Castes,
Series 1, India, Part II-B (ii), New Delhi, Registrar General and Census
Commissioner.
CENSUS OF INDIA (2001), Primary Census Abstract, Data Product No: 00-
73-2001-Cen-CD, New Delhi, Office of the Registrar General, India.
COHN B. (1987), The census, social structure and objectification in South
Asia, in COHN B. (ed.), An Anthropologist Among the Historians and
Other Essays, Delhi, Oxford University Press, 224-254.
DAS A.N (1994), India Invented: A Nation in the Making, New Delhi,
Manohar.
DESHPANDE S., SUNDER N. (1998), Caste and census: Implications for
society and the social sciences, Economic and Political Weekly,
August 8, 2157-2159.
DIRKS N.B. (2001), Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern
India, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 302.
GAIT E.A. (1913), Census of India, 1911, Vol. 1, India, Part I-Report,
Superintendent Calcutta, Government Printing, India.
GUHA S. (2003), The politics of identity and enumeration in India C. 1600-
1990, Comparative Study of Sociology and History, 45(1), 148-167.
GHURYE G.S. (1924), The Caste and Class in India, Bombay, Popular Book
Depot.
HUTTON J.H. (1931), Census of India 1931, Vol. 1, New Delhi, Reprinted by
Gyan Publishing House, 1996, 419-502.
GUPTA D. (2004), Introduction the certitude of caste: When identity
trumps hierarchy, Contributions to Indian Sociology, 38(1&2), v-xv.
JONES K.W. (1981), Religious identity and Indian census, in BARRIER N.G.
(ed.), The Census in British India: New Perspectives, New Delhi,
Manohar.
KAVIRAJ S (1993), The imaginary institution of India, in CHATTERJEE P.,
PANDEY G. (eds.), Subaltern Studies VII, Delhi, Oxford University
Press.
KERTZER D.I., AREL D. (2002), Census and Identity: The Politics of Race,
Ethnicity and Language in National Censuses, Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press.
KRISHNAKUMAR A. (2000), Caste and the census, Frontline, 17(18), 2-15.
LERIDON H. (1999), The ethnic variable as a statistical category,
Population: An English Selection, 11, 189-192.
RAM B. BHAGAT
134
MASSEY D.S. (1995), The new immigration and ethnicity in the United
States, Population and Development Review, 21(3), 631-652.
MAZUMDAR V. (n.d.), Human Rights and Human Development in India, New
Delhi Centre for Womens Development Studies.
NOBLES M. (2000), Shades of Citizenship: Race and the Census in Modern
Politics, Standford, Standford University Press, CA.
PADMANABHA P. (1978), Indian Census and Anthropological Investigations,
New Delhi, Registrar General, India (Paper prepared for X International
Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences held in New
Delhi 1978).
PAKISTAN CENSUS ORGANISATION (1998), Census Report of Pakistan 1998,
Govt. of Pakistan, (downloaded from website of Population Association
of Pakistan, Islamabad.
http://www.pap.org.pk/statistics/population.htm accessed on August 20,
2005.
PEACH C. (2000) Discovering white ethnicity and parachuted plurality,
Progress in Human Geography, 24(4), 620-626.
PINTO A. (1998), Should caste be included in the census, Economic and
Political Weekly, August 1, 2058-2060.
PINTO A. (2001), The great forgery, Mainstream, March, 15-16.
PREWITT K. (2001), The US decennial census: Political questions, scientific
answers, Population and Development Review, 26(1), 1-16.
RAMAIAH A. (1992), Identifying the Other Backward Classes, Economic
and Political Weekly, June 6, 1203-1207.
RANDERIA S. (2001), Nation-State, Democracy and Development in India
(1947-99), Coimbra, Centro de Estudos Sociais.
SHETH D.L. (1999), Secularisation of caste and making of new middle
class, Economic and Political Weekly, August 21-28, (Special
Articles).
SRIVASTAVA S.C. (1972), Indian Census in Perspective, Census Centenary
Monograph No 1, New Delhi, Office of the Registrar General, India.
UPADHYA C. (1997), Social and cultural strategies of class formation in
coastal Andhra Pradesh, Contributions to Indian Sociology, 31(2),
169-194.
VIJYANUNNI M. (1999), Re-introduce the caste questions in 2001 Census,
Demography India, 28, 273-277.