Karnataka HC hears arguments on pleas to stay socio-economic survey

Bengaluru, Sep 23 (PTI) The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday heard petitions challenging the state government’s decision to allow the Karnataka State Backward Classes Commission to conduct the Socio-Economic and Educational Survey, which began on September 22 and is expected to go on till October 7.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Joshi directed the state to spell out its stance.

“If every resident is identified and caste is determined, how is this different?” the bench asked orally.

Appearing for the state, Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that the petitioners have wrongly projected the exercise as a ‘caste survey’.

He maintained that it is a socio-economic and educational study aimed at collecting statistical data to frame welfare measures.

Singhvi stressed that policy-making cannot be rational without reliable data.

“How does one give rational advice or choose rational policy without having data?” he asked, contending that interim relief should be granted only in the “rarest of rare” cases.

The lawyer further submitted that furnishing information for the survey would be voluntary, unlike the mandatory provisions of the Census Act.

Singhvi argued that data collection by itself does not amount to an invasion of privacy and cannot be subjected to judicial review unless the enabling law itself is struck down.

Senior Advocate Prabhuling K Navadgi, appearing for one of the petitioners, pointed out that the State had issued a handbook making Aadhaar and mobile numbers compulsory for participation.

He claimed that the State lacked the constitutional authority to undertake such an exercise, citing the restrictions under Article 342 of the Constitution.

Navadgi also cited Article 342A, which empowers States to prepare their own backward classes list, but only ‘by law’.

Senior Advocate Jayakumar Patil contended that the Karnataka Backward Classes Commission Act does not provide any mechanism for a statewide survey and that the move was nothing short of a ‘parallel census’, which lies within the exclusive domain of the Union government.

He labelled the survey as a “colourable exercise of power” designed to determine caste populations for electoral purposes.

Another senior advocate, Ashok Haranahalli argued that the enumeration process lacked any prior study, was arbitrary, and carried the risk of duplication and inaccuracies.

He raised concerns over the potential breach of informational privacy, given the digital nature of data collection.

Senior Advocate Vivek Subba Reddy called the exercise "unscientific and chaotic", saying it grouped castes in ways that ignored traditional structures.

He warned that sensitive data could be misused: “This whole exercise of enumerating the entire population is a colourable exercise of power. The State wants to data mine now,” he submitted.

Senior Advocate Sriranga S said the survey was being carried out in undue haste and urged the court to grant a stay until a detailed examination of the issues.

The hearing will resume on Wednesday. PTI COR GMS GMS ROH