<p>The release of the much-awaited report of socio-economic survey (popularly known as caste census) has been delayed again.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Social Welfare Minister H Anjaneya had recently announced that the State Backward Classes Commission, under whose aegis the census was conducted, would be submitting its report to the state government on August 20, to coincide with the birth centenary of former chief minister D Devaraj Urs. However, that will not happen. Analysis of the data collected is yet to be completed, according to commission member K N Lingappa.<br /><br />“The commission has to take a decision on the format of data which should be presented to the government. The data cannot be presented as such and it has to be analysed to make recommendations,” Lingappa pointed out. He said it was for the commission to finalise a date for submission of the report. At present, commission chairperson H Kantharaj is in New Delhi. It is more than a year since the commission has been compiling the data. Taken up at a cost of Rs 170 crore, the enumeration was held in April-May last year. The survey was taken up in each of the 1.31 crore households in Karnataka. But there had been complaints that thousands of households, especially in the jurisdiction of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), were left out. Caste-wise break-up of census data was collected under 54 heads including literacy, annual income, domestic expenditure, household data, occupation of household members, source of drinking water, lighting facility, immovable assets, among others. The last caste census in the state was held during the pre-Independence era in 1931.<br /><br />A section of ministers in the Siddaramaiah Cabinet has been expressing apprehension that making the caste census data public can open a Pandora’s box. In April this year, when some data pertaining to population details of some major castes was circulated in social media, there was an uproar with some community leaders staging protests claiming that the figures had been fudged to deny them reservation benefits. However, the commission was quick to deny that the data was authentic. <br /></p>
<p>The release of the much-awaited report of socio-economic survey (popularly known as caste census) has been delayed again.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Social Welfare Minister H Anjaneya had recently announced that the State Backward Classes Commission, under whose aegis the census was conducted, would be submitting its report to the state government on August 20, to coincide with the birth centenary of former chief minister D Devaraj Urs. However, that will not happen. Analysis of the data collected is yet to be completed, according to commission member K N Lingappa.<br /><br />“The commission has to take a decision on the format of data which should be presented to the government. The data cannot be presented as such and it has to be analysed to make recommendations,” Lingappa pointed out. He said it was for the commission to finalise a date for submission of the report. At present, commission chairperson H Kantharaj is in New Delhi. It is more than a year since the commission has been compiling the data. Taken up at a cost of Rs 170 crore, the enumeration was held in April-May last year. The survey was taken up in each of the 1.31 crore households in Karnataka. But there had been complaints that thousands of households, especially in the jurisdiction of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), were left out. Caste-wise break-up of census data was collected under 54 heads including literacy, annual income, domestic expenditure, household data, occupation of household members, source of drinking water, lighting facility, immovable assets, among others. The last caste census in the state was held during the pre-Independence era in 1931.<br /><br />A section of ministers in the Siddaramaiah Cabinet has been expressing apprehension that making the caste census data public can open a Pandora’s box. In April this year, when some data pertaining to population details of some major castes was circulated in social media, there was an uproar with some community leaders staging protests claiming that the figures had been fudged to deny them reservation benefits. However, the commission was quick to deny that the data was authentic. <br /></p>
