Karnataka is gearing up for its second socio-economic survey, scheduled to begin on Monday, September 22, 2025. This move by the Congress government follows the shelving of the previous survey’s report from 2015, along with its recommendations submitted in 2024. The new fortnight-long survey, led by the Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes, faces significant opposition, particularly from the BJP and several influential, land-owning, and numerically dominant communities.
The compilation of a provisional list of 1,400 castes by the Commission has stirred considerable controversy. The BJP has accused the Siddaramaiah government of trying to ‘divide Hindus.’ Both the BJP and various caste groups have voiced strong objections to the inclusion of Christian sub-castes—categories like Vokkaliga-Christian, Brahmana-Christian, and Lingayat Christian—which were first identified in the earlier survey based on self-identification.
Adding to the state government’s predicament, even Cabinet Ministers from dominant communities have expressed opposition to these new categorizations. Across party lines, caste leaders are concerned that the introduction of these ‘new castes’ could significantly reduce their reported population numbers.
During the recent Cabinet meeting, the Chief Minister faced considerable pressure to either cancel or delay the survey until these perceived ‘anomalies’ could be resolved. Prominent figures such as Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar, a powerful Vokkaliga leader, and senior Ministers M.B. Patil and Eshwar Khandre, representing the Veerashaiva-Lingayat community, were vocal in their opposition to the ‘new castes.’ In response, the Chief Minister instructed the Commission, which operates as an independent body, to mitigate the confusion by temporarily obscuring some of these ‘new castes’ from the main list, allowing individuals to identify under an ‘Others’ category.
While the opposition parties lay the blame for the current confusion squarely on the government, the Commission has clarified its stance. They stated that during the previous enumeration, it was members of these ‘new Christian sub-castes’ themselves who had requested distinct groupings. The Commission emphasized that the government played no role in the inclusion or deletion of any caste or sub-caste categories.
The RSS and BJP are closely watching the developments within the Veerashaiva-Lingayat community with apprehension. Two influential caste organizations, the Akhila Bharatha Veerashaiva Mahasabha and the Jagathika Lingayata Mahasabha, have urged their members to declare their religion as ‘Veerashaiva-Lingayat’ and ‘Lingayat,’ respectively, under the ‘Others’ column. Both bodies are actively seeking separate religious status for the community, despite differing on the exact terminology. This move has irked the BJP, which is concerned that these organizations are advising communities not to identify as ‘Hindu’. Prominent BJP leaders, including former Chief Ministers Basavaraj Bommai and Jagadish Shettar, have accused the Congress of exploiting caste organizations to ‘divide the Hindu community.’ This contrasts with calls from some BJP leaders, like Yatnal, who have urged Lingayats to identify as Hindus to retain quota benefits. It is worth noting that Cabinet Minister Eshwar Khandre serves as the general secretary of the Veerashaiva Mahasabha, while Congress leader Shamanur Shivashankarappa is its president.
Up until now, the primary discussion has revolved around how community members will identify themselves in the survey. Major communities, including Veerashaiva-Lingayats, Vokkaligas, Brahmins, Muslims, and Kurubas, are actively working to consolidate their numbers. The previous 2015 survey’s findings and recommendations were discarded, with the official reason being their age and the claim that they understated the populations of dominant communities. Historically, these groups have leveraged their estimated population figures to gain political influence.
The forthcoming report from this survey, along with its recommendations, holds immense significance for backward classes’ reservation policies, which currently account for 32% within the state’s total 56% reservation framework. While the core purpose of the survey is to accurately assess the ‘backwardness’ of different caste groups, the dominant communities have largely prioritized numerical consolidation, aiming to bolster their population figures.
Meanwhile, nomadic, semi-nomadic, and smaller communities within the Other Backward Classes, who were previously classified as ‘Most Backward’ in the earlier report, are holding onto hope that this survey will bring them significant advantages. Unfortunately, their voices are often overshadowed by the louder demands of the more dominant communities.