<p>Bengaluru: Speakers at a panel discussion held on Sunday said resistance to the ongoing socio-educational survey (<a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/caste-census">caste census</a>) by dominant castes was “irrational and against the welfare of the marginalised and the state.” </p>.<p>The discussion, organised by ‘Bahutva Karnataka,’ a citizens’ group, featured Prof A Narayana, academic and writer; Prof R Sunandamma, former HoD, Women’s Studies Dept, Karnataka Women’s University; Dr Azhar, research scholar, and Anisha Sheth, journalist. </p>.<p>Prof Narayana said it was a matter of concern that a simple data collection exercise had generated so much opposition. </p>.Finding truth in Karnataka's caste census beyond the challenges.<p>He also mentioned that development in India generally favours some groups over the others and there is a need to study that to ensure more egalitarian development. But in the absence of relevant data other than the 1931 census data, this survey is extremely important. </p>.<p>Prof Sunandamma said that the 2015 survey report had some lacunae as it did not substantiate some of its findings. </p>.<p>Dr Azhar mentioned that reports of the previous Backward Classes Commissions had established that religious minorities of the state, especially Christians and Muslims, are underdeveloped based on a range of criteria including education, employment, sex ratio, etc. </p>.<p>He said that while many state governments have set up schemes for the welfare of minorities, there are no policies for their development. This survey, he hoped, would help frame policies for the social and educational development of minorities.</p>.<p>He also drew attention to the fact that while money is allotted for minority welfare schemes, the funds are not utilised fully. </p>.<p>Sheth said the commission and the government had “failed” to communicate why the survey was important, and the constitutional framework and laws under which it was being done. </p>.<p>She mentioned that dominant castes opposed the previous survey calling it unscientific without suitable justification. She asked how a survey which covered 94 per cent of the state could be termed unscientific. </p>
<p>Bengaluru: Speakers at a panel discussion held on Sunday said resistance to the ongoing socio-educational survey (<a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/caste-census">caste census</a>) by dominant castes was “irrational and against the welfare of the marginalised and the state.” </p>.<p>The discussion, organised by ‘Bahutva Karnataka,’ a citizens’ group, featured Prof A Narayana, academic and writer; Prof R Sunandamma, former HoD, Women’s Studies Dept, Karnataka Women’s University; Dr Azhar, research scholar, and Anisha Sheth, journalist. </p>.<p>Prof Narayana said it was a matter of concern that a simple data collection exercise had generated so much opposition. </p>.Finding truth in Karnataka's caste census beyond the challenges.<p>He also mentioned that development in India generally favours some groups over the others and there is a need to study that to ensure more egalitarian development. But in the absence of relevant data other than the 1931 census data, this survey is extremely important. </p>.<p>Prof Sunandamma said that the 2015 survey report had some lacunae as it did not substantiate some of its findings. </p>.<p>Dr Azhar mentioned that reports of the previous Backward Classes Commissions had established that religious minorities of the state, especially Christians and Muslims, are underdeveloped based on a range of criteria including education, employment, sex ratio, etc. </p>.<p>He said that while many state governments have set up schemes for the welfare of minorities, there are no policies for their development. This survey, he hoped, would help frame policies for the social and educational development of minorities.</p>.<p>He also drew attention to the fact that while money is allotted for minority welfare schemes, the funds are not utilised fully. </p>.<p>Sheth said the commission and the government had “failed” to communicate why the survey was important, and the constitutional framework and laws under which it was being done. </p>.<p>She mentioned that dominant castes opposed the previous survey calling it unscientific without suitable justification. She asked how a survey which covered 94 per cent of the state could be termed unscientific. </p>
