Socio-Economic & Educational Survey 'Voluntary', Citizens Can Refuse To Give Data: State Tells Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday heard a challenge against the State's approval to conduct a survey of the social and educational status of citizens under the supervision of the Karnataka State Backward Classes Commission.

In opposing the challenge as well as stay of the survey, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the State, submitted that the petitioners had mischaracterised the exercise, which would be a socio-economic and educational survey, by calling it a caste survey.

"It is their [State's] stand that each resident is identified and caste will be determined, then what will be the difference?," the division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Joshi orally asked at the outset.

Singhvi submitted that welfare measures cannot be done without statistical data, and it is not open to judicial review, and an interim order is to be given in the rarest of rare cases.

"How on earth does (one) give a rational advice or choose rational policy without having data?" Singhvi questioned.

It was submitted that the petitioners do not want to challenge the decision, but the process of collection of data for decision-making.

"Unless lordships would say that my entire act is unconstitutional, which would be if at all after final hearing. Then there is no question of interim orders. If this proposition of petitioners is accepted then every data collection would be census...there is no invasion of privacy when govt collects data for enumeration," he submitted.

It was further submitted that the act of giving data would be voluntary, as opposed to the census act, where it is compulsory.

Sr Adv Prabhuling K Navadgi, for one of the petitioners, submitted that the State and Commission issued a handbook for carrying out the survey, making it compulsory for Aadhar and Mobile number to be given.

It was stated that these petitions call into question the government order since the State has no power to conduct a survey due to the bar under Article 342 of the Constitution.

Navadgi referred to Article 342 (A) of Constitution— (3) Notwithstanding any contained in clauses (1) and (2), every State or Union territory may, by law, prepare and maintain, for its own purposes, a list of socially and educationally backward classes, entries in which may be different from the Central List.

Sr Adv Jaykumar Patil, for another petitioner, submitted that Section 9(1)(ii) of the Karnataka Backward Commission Act does not provide any mechanism for survey, and this legislation, including amendment, would not be sufficient to supersede Article 342 since it is a survey being conducted in respect of the entire population of the State.

It was submitted that what was sought to be undertaken was nothing other than a Census in full pervasiveness. It was submitted that it is contrary to Article 342A, and an act which is in the exclusive domain of the Union Government.

It was labelled as a colourable exercise of power to find out the population of each caste for the political purposes of an election.

Sr Adv Ashok Haranahalli submitted that the enumeration of the caste list is being done in an arbitrary manner. It was stated that this enumeration is not backed by any study, and this might lead to duplication, resulting in incorrect data being given by people.

It was argued that informational privacy exists, and there was a risk of leak of this digitally collected information. It was submitted that the questions asked in the survey are virtually profiling a person, and such kind of survey is not permissible.

Senior Advocate Vivek Subba Reddy submitted that there exist innumerable castes which are mingled with religion, and the new lists have led to an unscientific grouping, since the Commission has not applied its mind to the main caste itself.

It was submitted that the artificial creation of caste lacks application of mind, and leads to confusion and chaos.

"This whole exercise of entire population is a colourable exercise of power, getting to know vital data will be weaponised it. State wants to data mine now," it was submitted.

Sr Adv Sriranga S for another petitioner submitted that there is undue haste in the exercise, and at this stage, the balance of convenience would be for the State and Commission to stay its hand till the issues are gone into.

The hearing will continue tomorrow.

Case: RAJYA VOKKALIGA SANGHA (R) v. Karnataka State Backward Classes Commission &Others

Case No: WP 28665/2025 c/w WP 28668/2025, WP 28670/2025, WP 28671/2025