After a 6-year delay, India’s Census 2027 has finally begun. But the prolonged delay is not the only issue drawing attention. Opposition parties, social justice groups, civil society organisations and experts have raised serious questions over the timing, methodology and design of the exercise, alleging that, like the SIR of electoral rolls, the Census too is being conducted in a manner influenced by a particular ideological and political agenda.
The controversy has intensified over the 40-point questionnaire prepared for the exercise. The 2011 Census questionnaire contained 29 questions. Critics argue that several of the additional questions seek information that is either unnecessary for a census or raises concerns over privacy, identity and the possible future use of personal data.
The second phase of the Census has begun in Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, with a facility for self-enumeration, while enumeration in the rest of the country is scheduled for Feb. 2027.
A Census is not merely an exercise in counting people. It determines how the state understands its population and provides critical data for planning, resource allocation, welfare policies and political representation. The present exercise is particularly significant because it is being conducted after a gap of 16 years and amid intense debates over citizenship, electoral rights, caste representation, delimitation and the protection of personal data.
Breaking With a Century-Old Tradition
India conducted its Census in the first year of every decade. From 1871 to 2011, the decennial exercise broadly followed this established pattern. The 2021 Census was postponed because of the COVID-19 pandemic.Critics say the exercise could have been conducted later while retaining the 2021 Census designation, or postponed until 2030 so that the next decennial Census could have taken place in 2031. Instead, the government has chosen to conduct the exercise in 2026, with March 1, 2027, as the reference date. They see the political and administrative considerations behind the timing.
The Opposition has described the Census format issued by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs on Aug. 14 as ‘deceptive’ and a ‘betrayal’. Critics are particularly concerned about questions seeking detailed information about parents, including their religion, place of birth and other personal details.They question the demographic or developmental necessity of collecting such information and argue that the exercise could generate highly detailed profiles of individuals, families and communities.The concern is about the nature of the information being sought, the manner in which it will be stored and the possibility that Census information could eventually be linked with other government databases.
These apprehensions have become more pronounced because the Census is taking place alongside the SIR of electoral rolls, which has required citizens to provide extensive documentation to establish their identity and eligibility as voters.Although the two exercises are formally distinct, critics fear that the simultaneous expansion of data collection could eventually facilitate wider forms of data linkage.The government therefore needs to explain why each new category of information has been included, what safeguards are in place and whether Census data can be accessed or linked with other databases.
The central question is consequently not merely why the Census was delayed for six years, but whether an exercise traditionally regarded as a neutral statistical instrument is being reshaped in ways that could serve a broader political or ideological agenda.
The Caste Census Controversy
Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi wrote to Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Aug. 20, demanding that the methodology adopted in Bihar and Telangana be implemented nationally. They argued that effective social justice policies require accurate data on the caste composition and socio-economic condition of the population.The Congress argues that the absence of a comprehensive response demonstrates the government’s unwillingness to address a question that has major implications for social justice.
The controversy also has a political history.On April 28, 2024, Modi had criticised the demand for a caste census, describing it as reflective of an ‘Urban Naxal’ mindset. A year later, on Apr. 30, 2025, he announced that a caste census would be conducted.The Opposition now alleges that the methodology notified on Aug. 14 effectively undermines that commitment.
The controversy centres particularly on Question 10, which deals with caste. Critics point out that the questionnaire does not explicitly mention the OBC category.The omission is politically significant because Modi has repeatedly highlighted his OBC background and his government’s decision to provide constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes.Opposition leaders argue that a genuinely comprehensive caste census could reveal the extent of the representation,or under-representation,of different communities in India’s social, economic and institutional structures.They contend that such data could expose the continued dominance of upper castes in influential institutions and strengthen demands for a more equitable distribution of opportunities and political power.
The Opposition has consequently described the current exercise as a ‘self-defeating and purposeless census’, arguing that it will serve little purpose if it cannot accurately establish the size and socio-economic condition of the OBC population.
The Opposition’s argument extends beyond population figures.It points to the negligible representation of OBC, SC and ST communities in institutions and sectors that exercise enormous influence over public life,including the higher judiciary, senior bureaucracy, major corporations and the media.The absence of reliable caste data makes it difficult to measure such disparities scientifically and design policies to address them.This is one reason, they argue, why a comprehensive caste census has become politically sensitive.
Another major concern is the method of recording caste identities.The questionnaire leaves the caste response effectively open-ended rather than providing a structured and standardised list. Under such a system, enumerators may record whatever caste or sub-caste name a respondent provides.Given India’s extraordinary diversity of caste identities, this could potentially produce thousands of different entries, making the final data difficult to classify and analyse.
The Opposition argues that the Union and state governments already maintain caste lists that could be incorporated into the Census methodology. A standardised list would reduce inconsistencies and make the resulting data more useful.
A 2021 affidavit by the Union Ministry of Education before the Supreme Court had also underlined the importance of preparing a comprehensive caste list before undertaking such an exercise.The Congress has therefore demanded that the government adopt the Telangana model rather than the present format.The Telangana exercise, the SEEEPC survey, examined five broad dimensions – Social, Economic, Employment, Educational and Political – of families and communities. It was presented as a more comprehensive approach to understanding social and economic inequality.
Census, Data Linkage and Delimitation
Another major concern is the possibility of linking Census information with other government databases. The questionnaire seeks information relating to caste, religion, disability, migration, occupation and family circumstances while other government exercises are simultaneously collecting identity and citizenship-related information.Critics fear that the cumulative effect could create an extensive database capable of being used for purposes beyond conventional Census planning.
The timing also matters because the constitutional freeze on the allocation of Lok Sabha and Assembly seats among states remains linked to the first Census conducted after 2026. The population figures emerging from the next Census are therefore expected to play an important role in the future delimitation of constituencies.This could have major consequences for the balance of political representation among states.
States that successfully controlled population growthshould not be politically penalised for their demographic performance. Any future delimitation must therefore address not only population figures but also the principles of federalism and equitable representation.
Questions have also been raised over the treatment of disability.The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, recognises 21 categories of disabilities. The Census framework does not adequately reflect this diversity and instead clubs several disabilities together while leaving some categories insufficiently represented.
The Constitutional Conduct Group, a collective of former civil servants, has also expressed concern over several aspects of Census 2027. Its concerns relate to the purpose of data collection, confidentiality, the quality and usefulness of the information generated and the representation of India’s social, religious and linguistic diversity.The group has also warned against allowing the Census to become a vehicle for NPR.
Linguist and cultural scholar Dr. G.N. Devy has been among the strongest critics of the present exercise. In an article, he described it as a ‘gigantic miscounting exercise’.Devy, who documented 780 living languages through the People’s Linguistic Survey of India, has questioned the Census timeline, methodology, design and expected outcomes.He warns that an inadequately designed exercise could generate what he calls ‘digital garbage’ rather than reliable statistical knowledge.
One major concern is the treatment of religion.Several tribal communities have long demanded a separate Sarna category in the Census, arguing that their religious traditions are distinct and that they should not automatically be counted as Hindus.Devy argues that the religion question reflects an inadequate understanding of India’s diverse religious practices, particularly among tribal communities.Anthropological researchshows that many tribal traditions are not organised around temples or scriptures in the manner associated with major organised religions.Critics fear that forcing people to identify with only one religionor as having no religionmay fail to capture the complex and overlapping identities found among tribal and indigenous communities.
Language is another area where critics fear the Census may distort India’s diversity. In the 2011 Census, 1,369 mother tongues were grouped under 121 languages. Critics have questioned the criterion used to recognise languages separately, including the threshold of 10,000 speakers.They also object to the classification of several major languages as sub-groups or dialects of other languages.Bhojpuri, for instance, was recorded as the mother tongue of more than five crore people but classified within the broader Hindi grouping. As many as 55 languages were similarly merged into Hindi.Critics argue that such classification artificially increases the reported number of Hindi speakers while diminishing the statistical visibility of other linguistic communities.
Urdu is a particularly contentious case. Its recorded number of speakers has reportedly declined in successive Censuses. Critics allege that in some northern states, Urdu-speaking respondents have sometimes found Hindi recorded in the mother-tongue column.At the same time, they acknowledge that a lack of awareness among sections of Urdu speakers about the importance of correctly identifying their mother tongue may also contribute to undercounting.
Devy has also questioned the inclusion of information such as bank-account numbers, Aadhaar numbers, telephone numbers and details about spouses.If such information is already available with government agencies, he asks, why does the Census require it again?The concern becomes particularly serious when sensitive personal information is collected in a political climate marked by debates over interfaith marriages, citizenship and minority rights.Critics fear that information collected for statistical purposes could, if improperly accessed or combined with other databases, be misused by state agencies or non-state actors.
For a country as socially, linguistically and culturally diverse as India, the way identities are recorded in official statistics can have consequences extending far beyond the Census itself.