The Supreme Court of India has today declined to entertain a plea seeking separate enumeration of Denotified, Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic Tribes (DNTs) in the national Census, observing that such demands fall within the realm of policy and are best addressed by the executive.
The matter was heard by a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, which expressed concern over the increasing tendency to seek further classification within society. During the course of the hearing, the Court remarked that instead of moving towards a casteless social order, such exercises may risk deepening divisions by multiplying categories.
The petitioners had urged the Court to direct the Union Government to create a distinct category for DNT communities in the Census, contending that their absence as a separately identifiable group has led to inadequate data and, in turn, insufficient policy attention. It was argued that these communities, many of which have historically faced exclusion and stigma, require formal recognition to enable more targeted welfare measures.
However, the Bench was not inclined to intervene in the matter. It observed that decisions relating to enumeration, classification, and data collection in a Census exercise involve complex socio-political and administrative considerations. Such issues, the Court noted, require policy-level deliberation and cannot be effectively adjudicated in the exercise of writ jurisdiction.
Emphasising the limits of judicial review in such contexts, the Court reiterated that it cannot issue directions on matters that are fundamentally legislative or executive in nature. At the same time, it indicated that the concerns raised by the petitioners could be placed before the appropriate authorities for consideration.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the petition, granting liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent government bodies with their representation. The decision reflects the Court’s consistent approach of maintaining a clear demarcation between judicial functions and policy formulation, particularly in matters involving large-scale administrative exercises such as the Census.