Telangana SEEEPC Survey and Composite Backwardness Index: IEWG Says Survey Can Be a National Model

Background of Telangana SEEEPC Survey

• The Telangana government conducted the Social, Economic, Educational, Employment, Political and Caste Survey (SEEEPC) during 2024–25.
• The objective was to create a comprehensive database of caste-wise social and economic conditions across the State.
• Unlike traditional caste enumeration, the survey did not focus only on population share. It attempted to understand the actual extent of backwardness by studying multiple dimensions such as income, education, occupation, political participation, and access to welfare.
• This makes it one of the most comprehensive caste-based socio-economic surveys conducted by any Indian State.
• The findings were later examined by the Independent Expert Working Group headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice B. Sudershan Reddy.

What the Survey Covered?

The survey covered:

• More than 3.5 crore people
• 242 castes
•  75 different data fields
• Six major domains of backwardness

These six domains were:

This broad structure makes the Telangana survey much wider than earlier caste-based assessments.

Composite Backwardness Index (CBI)

• The most important feature of the survey is the Composite Backwardness Index (CBI).
• This is a new metric developed to measure backwardness using 42 parameters.
• Instead of simply counting population numbers, CBI attempts to quantify deprivation and compare communities on a measurable scale.
• Higher the CBI score, greater the backwardness.
• This is considered a major methodological shift because it focuses on deprivation rather than population strength.
• The average state-wide CBI score was found to be 81.
• This allowed direct comparison across communities and helped identify which groups were more deprived than the state average.
• It is one of the first large-scale exercises in India to use a single measurable backwardness score.

Major Findings of the Survey

Population Composition

Average CBI Scores

These figures show that SCs and STs are nearly three times more backward than the more privileged communities.

Other Important Findings

• 135 out of 242 castes had a CBI score above the state average of 81
• These 135 castes account for nearly 67% of the total population
• More than 1.1 crore people earn below ₹1 lakh annually
• 58% of these low-income individuals belong to BCs
•  Around 20% of relatively less backward communities were still receiving welfare schemes such as Rythu Bharosa and free power
• More than 30% of private sector professionals were from OCs, compared to only 14% from SCs and 4% from STs

The report also highlighted that access to English-medium education strongly influences long-term socio-economic mobility.

Comparison with Mandal Commission

The Telangana survey is often compared with the Mandal Commission because both deal with backward class identification.

The IEWG described the Telangana report as an “X-ray of society” because of this wider and deeper approach.

Constitutional Basis of Backward Class Identification

The Constitution does not define the term “Backward Classes” directly. This is because backwardness is dynamic and differs across regions and time. Instead, the Constitution provides enabling provisions.

Article 15(4)

• Inserted by the First Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951. It allows the State to make special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes, along with SCs and STs.
• This forms the legal basis for reservations in education and welfare measures.

Article 16(4)

It allows reservation in public employment for backward classes that are not adequately represented in government services. This provision connects backwardness with representation.

Article 340 and Backward Class Commissions

Article 340 empowers the President to appoint a commission to investigate the conditions of socially and educationally backward classes.

Its purpose is to ensure that backward class identification is based on evidence and not political assumption.

This led to major commissions such as:

• Kaka Kalelkar Commission
• Mandal Commission

These commissions shaped India’s reservation framework.

The Telangana SEEEPC survey performs a similar function at the State level by creating a data-based foundation for policy decisions.

Sub-categorisation of OBCs and Rohini Commission

• The survey found major differences even within Backward Classes.
• This supports the idea that “every backward caste is not equally backward.”
• This is directly linked to the debate on sub-categorisation of OBCs.
• The Rohini Commission was created by the Union Government to study equitable distribution of OBC reservation benefits.
• Its objective is to ensure that dominant OBC groups do not capture most of the reservation benefits while more deprived OBC groups remain excluded.
• The Telangana survey provides strong empirical support for such sub-categorisation debates

Significance of the Survey

• The survey strengthens evidence-based policymaking by identifying deprivation more accurately.
• It helps reduce inclusion errors where relatively better-off groups receive welfare benefits.
• It improves the possibility of targeted welfare for truly deprived communities.
• It expands the idea of backwardness beyond caste population numbers and includes political and employment deprivation.
• It supports constitutional justification for reservation and affirmative action.
• It also creates a model for other States that may conduct similar exercises.
• This reflects a broader shift toward decentralised and data-driven governance.

Challenges and Concerns

• Any caste-based survey can generate political contestation and demands for reservation revision.
• Methodology must remain transparent and publicly defensible.
• Using CBI for policy decisions may trigger legal scrutiny regarding reservation limits and constitutional validity.
• Updating beneficiary lists based on dynamic deprivation scores may create social tensions.
• The survey provides data, but policy recommendations require political and legal consensus.
• There is also a challenge in converting statistical findings into fair administrative action.

Way Forward

• The data should be used carefully for improving welfare targeting and not only for political mobilisation.
• Sub-categorisation of backward classes should be based on transparent empirical evidence.
• Education reforms, especially English-medium access, should be prioritised for mobility.
• Welfare schemes must be periodically reviewed using updated deprivation indicators.
• Other States can study the Telangana model for better social justice policy.
• A national framework for evidence-based backwardness identification may emerge in the future.

Conclusion

The Telangana SEEEPC survey marks an important shift from population-based caste politics to deprivation-based social justice policy.

Its use of the Composite Backwardness Index provides a stronger empirical foundation for welfare and reservation debates.

By combining caste data with multidimensional indicators, the State has created one of the most advanced social justice datasets in India.

If used carefully, this model can improve both fairness and efficiency in governance and may become a template for other States and the country.