‘If we add claims of all communities, I wonder what the State’s population would be’

K. Jayaprakash Hegde, former president of the Karnataka State Commission for the back classes, presented the socioeconomic and educational report of the educational survey (census) to the state government in 2024. The report, the cabinet of Ha has, the Cabinet of Has, the Cabinet of Has, the Cabinet of Has, the Cabinet of Has, the cabinet He has made the Cabinet of Has, ha, ha Cabinet, ha Cabinet, ha Cabinet, Ha Cabinet, Ha Cabinet, Ha Cabinet, Ha Cabinet has made the cabinet ha ha ha ha ha ha, ha, ha, Cabinet, has cabinet, has cabinet has made the cabinet of has made the cabinet has made the cabinet Cabinet, Ha Cabinet, Ha Cabinet, Ha Cabinet, has made the Cabinet of Ha has done, ha ha, Cabinet, Cabinet Ha, week. The Hindu He spoke with him about the problems that were discussed around the contentious report.

Edited experiences:

The leaders of some communities have said that the survey is not scientific and all houses were not visited. How do you defend the survey?

The survey was conducted by more than 1.3 Lakh Masters of the State, supervised by government machinery. There was a pro form with 56 questions to collect socio, economic and educational details of each family, including their caste. These pro forms are still with the district administrations, including the signatures of the people interviewed. The answers to 56 questions, with the signatures cannot be manufactured by teachers. These bulky data were digitized by Bharat Electronics LTD (BEL) and ratified by the Indian Institute of Administration, Bangalore. I do not understand how it can be called not scientist.

Not only Verashaiva-Lingayats and the Voccal axis, several other communities have also played their population count. Many say the topographs had not visited all homes.

It is true that we do not have the legs capable of covering each home. The projected population of the State in 2015 was 6.35 million rupees and we have covered more than 6 million rupees, which is about 95% of the state population. It is a very good survey of any objective criteria. More than more than those 30 Lakh-more of the population not included in the survey, there is no way that only some community homes can be left, when the survey is a decentralized activity by 1.3 LAKH of the government of all communities and regions.

Each community seems to be inflating its numbers. If the statements of all communities are praised, I wonder what the state population would be. Meanwhile, the government still has the option to update the survey, if it feels that it is necessary.

But in the case of Veashaiva-Lingayats, some members of their subtitles such as Lingayats, Banajiga Lingayats and Sadara Lingayats may have identified as belonging to their equivalent communities in the largest 2nd. I don’t deny this. But the survey cannot be criticized for this.

Upon reaching the recommendations of the commission he directed, one of the recommendations that opposes is to apply a creamy layer for even category 1, which has most of the backward communities. Why was it introduced?

Recently, even the Supreme Court has said that the creamy layer must be applied to all reserve categories. This will prevent the same sections within a community to obtain benefits from the reserve throughout the generations. It is a progressive step to guarantee a better distribution of reserve benefits.

Many communities, including Kurubas, generally considered well, have gone from a more backward category to most of the backward category. What tells us about the reserve as a tool or social elevation in the last four decades?

An expert committee was constituted to evaluate each community based on their socio -economic and educational indicators, who find out about the survey. Each community was marked by 200 brands and, depending on the brands granted to each community and slabs chosen, the communities have been classified as most setback, more backward and late. This is not an ad hoc classification. It is based on the data collected and the decision of the expert committee.

The communities that go from the previous classification of more backward to most of those backward in our recommendation, does not mean they have receded. This is the first time that this quality of socioeconomic and educational data is available for each community. This reflects reality as previous classifications, based on medium rod surveys and sometimes ad hoc decisions. For example, it is revealed that Kurubas are more backward than is perceived.

There are concerns that some communities such as the Kurubas, who consult being relatively dominant and are in large quantities, will dominate a category, depriving other smaller communities in the same category of reserve benefits. Kurubas are now in category 1B with a 12%reserve, exle according to their recommendations station, along with several other narrower communities. How to avoid such a scenario?

The application of the creamy layer must prevent misuse and protect that misuse and protect smaller communities.

The Panchamasal have been demanding that they be reserved in a separate category and not together with Verashaiva Lingayats. Your demand does not have a leg with ashes according to your recommendations. What is the rational behind this?

The Panchamasal are a group of veereshaiva-Lingyats subcacees and share the same characteristics. All castes of a community remain in the same reserve category and, therefore, the panchasal cannot be transferred to another category.