The Supreme Court recently disposed of a plea which challenged the Patna High Court’s May 4th order.
The order had imposed an interim stay on the ongoing caste-based survey in Bihar.
A bench comprising Justice BR Gavai and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra was hearing the Bihar government plea against the high court’s interim order.
The temporary stay had been ordered by a division bench of the Patna High Court while they were determining the state government’s competence to conduct the survey. The top court disposed of the petition as both sides’ counsel agreed that the matter had become infructuous due to the high court already reserving its verdict.
The Case
The most recent comprehensive caste-based census took place in 1931, during British-led governance. Given caste’s significant influence on Indian electoral politics, the idea of collecting data based on this closed social stratification has naturally sparked controversy. The Bihar government, led by Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, initiated a caste-based survey on January 7 of this year, aiming to digitally compile data on each family from the panchayat to the district level through a mobile application.
In the same month, several petitions were filed before the Supreme Court, urging it to invalidate the state government’s notification for conducting the caste-based census. However, Justice Gavai, heading the bench, refused to entertain the pleas, stating that it was not public interest litigation but mere “publicity” interest litigation. The petitioners then agreed to withdraw their petitions as directed by the judge.
Subsequently, in April, the question of the state government’s competence to conduct the exercise returned to the Supreme Court through a special leave petition (SLP). The apex court declined to entertain the SLP but granted the petitioners the liberty to submit an application for interim relief. Additionally, the court directed the Patna High Court to decide the matter within three days from the filing of the application and mentioning it before the chief justice’s court.
In response, a division bench of the Patna High Court, comprising Justices K Vinod Chandran and Madhuresh Prasad, heard the petitioners’ application for interim relief and suspended the survey conducted by the state government. The court opined that conducting a census-like exercise was the Union’s prerogative under Entry 69 of the Seventh Schedule’s List I, along with the Census Act, 1948.
The Bihar government argued that collecting caste data would help shape policies in accordance with citizens’ backwardness and design more effective affirmative action programs. However, the high court did not agree with this contention, stating that the exercise was not about identifying backwardness but about ascertaining individuals’ caste status. The court also raised concerns about consent, data security, and privacy rights, particularly regarding sharing data with political leaders.
Following the high court’s stay order, the Bihar government approached the Supreme Court. The top court adjourned the hearing ahead of the summer vacation, expecting the Patna High Court to hear the matter in July. The government’s plea was set to be heard on July 14 if not addressed by the high court by then. On July 7, arguments concluded, and the Patna High Court’s division bench reserved its verdict.
