The Karnataka High Court has raised important questions regarding the state government’s ongoing social and educational survey conducted under the supervision of the Karnataka State Backward Classes Commission. During the hearing of a batch of petitions challenging the government order approving the survey, the Court asked whether enumerators have been instructed to clearly inform citizens that participation in the survey is voluntary and that they are under no obligation to provide information, including their Aadhaar number.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C. M. Joshi pointed out that the survey handbook and instructions seem to encourage enumerators to make repeated visits to households, creating pressure on citizens to comply, instead of informing them that they can refuse to participate. The Court stressed that citizens’ autonomy and their right to privacy must be protected, and that enumerators should clearly state upfront that the survey is voluntary.
The Bench also inquired about the classification of castes for the purpose of the survey. The counsel for the Commission explained that the caste categories were based on disclosures from earlier surveys and existing lists, which were being used only as a reference. It was emphasized that the survey does not create new caste classifications or impose caste identities on citizens, as individuals themselves are expected to disclose their caste voluntarily if they choose to do so.
The Court further examined the technical aspects of the survey. It was informed that the listing of houses is being carried out with the help of electricity metre readers, and that each house has been geo-tagged and assigned a Unique House Identification number along with a QR code. This system enables enumerators to accurately identify households and directly reach the intended survey locations.
A significant issue that drew the Court’s attention was the collection of Aadhaar numbers. The Commission’s counsel argued that Aadhaar was being sought purely as an identification measure to avoid duplication of data and prevent entries from enumerators belonging to other States. The Court, however, questioned why the survey form validates or mandates Aadhaar numbers if the information is supposed to be voluntary, highlighting concerns that citizens may feel compelled to disclose sensitive personal data without being informed of their right to refuse.
The practice of pasting stickers on houses to mark survey completion was also scrutinized by the Court. These stickers reportedly instruct residents not to remove them. The Bench asked on what legal authority such instructions were being given and whether residents had the option to decline such markings. The counsel clarified that participation was voluntary and that stickers could be removed, but the Court remained concerned about the impression of compulsion.
The High Court reiterated that respect for individual privacy is paramount. It stressed that enumerators should mandatorily inform households at the very beginning of their visit that the survey is voluntary and that refusal to participate will be accepted without consequence. The judges observed that without such clarity, respondents might feel pressured into providing personal details, including Aadhaar numbers, against their will.
The matter remains under consideration, with the Court focusing on whether the methodology, instructions to enumerators, and data collection practices are consistent with constitutional safeguards and citizens’ rights. Further hearings will determine the extent to which the government must revise its procedures to ensure voluntary participation and respect for privacy in the ongoing survey.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.