The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has held that whether the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category or any other caste should be included in the Census is a matter of government policy, declining to issue directions to the Centre for OBC enumeration.

A Division Bench of Justice C.V. Karthikeyan and Justice R. Sakthivel made the observation while disposing of two writ petitions seeking inclusion of the OBC category in the House Listing Operation (HLO) and Population Enumeration (PE). The common order was passed on August 27, 2026.

Petitions sought inclusion of OBC category

One petition, filed in 2020, sought a direction to the authorities to consider a representation requesting that the OBC category be included in the HLO and Population Enumeration before the commencement of the decennial Census 2021.

The second petition challenged a September 15, 2020 notification and sought its quashing, along with a direction to consider a representation seeking inclusion of OBCs in the Census.

The notification recorded the Union Government’s policy decision to stop caste-wise population enumeration other than for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The petitioners sought judicial intervention to include the OBC category as well.

'Whether to include OBC category is a policy decision'

The High Court, however, declined to direct the Centre to adopt the requested methodology. The Bench observed: "whether to include the OBC category or any other caste in the Census is a policy decision".

The Court further noted that Census respondents may themselves choose whether or not to disclose their caste. "There cannot be any compulsion in this regard" the division bench said.

The observation is significant against the backdrop of the ongoing debate over how caste information other than SC/ST is to be recorded. Reports concerning the Census methodology have indicated that the Centre considered using existing Central and State OBC lists but ultimately retained an open-column approach, under which caste names can be entered rather than selected from a pre-defined OBC list.

One concern reportedly considered by officials was that OBC lists do not uniformly correspond to lists of individual castes, with some entries referring to broader social or occupational groups. This has subsequently become a point of criticism from those seeking a more structured method of OBC enumeration.

However, the Madras High Court was not called upon to adjudicate the technical merits of one Census software methodology over another. Its ruling was confined to whether the Court could direct inclusion of the OBC category as sought by the petitioners.

Court says policy cannot be dictated by judiciary

The Bench also noted that the new Census procedure had already commenced and that the rules governing the present Census would prevail. Making its approach clear, the Court observed: "it is not for the Courts to indicate the nature of the policy to be taken by the Government."

Consequently, both writ petitions were disposed of. Importantly, the Court did not quash the September 15, 2020 notification. No costs were imposed and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

Case Title: Thavamanidevi And Anr v. The Principle Secretary to Prime Minister, Government of India (with connected matters)

Date of Order: August 27, 2026

Bench: Justice C.V. Karthikeyan and Justice R. Sakthivel

Tags: