Former Chairman of Karnataka Bhovi Development Corporation, GV Seetharam, raised questions about the classification of Bhovis as a subkast instead of the main caste during the ongoing survey of the planned caste, which showed before the internal reserve.
In Sunday’s statement on Sunday Mr. Seetharam, who is also a spokesperson of the Karnataka Pradesh (KPCC) Congress Committee, he claimed that survey enumeration often enters “Adi Karnataka, Adi Andhra and Adi David” as the main caste and first in the main caste. The caste, as the main caste, such as the main Kaste, such as the main Kaste and is in the main capital, although it is the main Kaspe and enters the main Kaste and is to the main Kaspe and entry to the main Kaste and entry to Bhovi, although it is the main Kaspe and enters Bhovi, although the main caspe and enter Bhovi. Although on Adi Andhra and Adi Davida.
“This causes injustice to the community to Bh/Vaddar,” he said. The integration of Bhovi with 69 other sub -findings under the column of the partial caste caused “discrimination” against our community, Mr. Seetharam said.
In many places, Enumerators first recorded Bhovis as Adi Karnataka under the possibility of 003 and later recorded them as a partial caste until 023.1 as Bhovis, said, pointing out that thousands of community members have been registered in the last five days.
He argued that the enumerators were instructed to record Bhovis under a partial caste to the distinction of their main caste as Adi Karnataka. Seetharam claimed that the recorded data recorded in such a way were “incorrect” and demanded that the data be re -evaluated so that all of them be considered as members of the BH community.
Mr. Seetharam was also looking for an action against enumerators who accepted “defective” methodology, which led to “injustice” against the BH community.
The ongoing reconnaissance of the commission for one person, headed by HN Nagmohan Das, will list 101 castes under the planned castes before performing an internal reservation.
Mr. Seetharam also raised the question of contradictory demands on the historical classification of Adi Karnataka, Adi David and Adi Andhra. “Some say they are not names of the caste, while some others claim that these castes were listed in the 1950s presidential order and in all subsequent changes. So what is right?” He asked.
Other problems raised by Mr. Seetharam include the reference to Bhovis as “ST” instead of “SC” in ration cards issued by the Ministry of Food and Civic Deliveries.
“We belong to the SC community and our caste data should be recorded as such. Instead of relying on rations, our Aadhaar cards, voter ID or caste certificates should be accepted as valid evidence,” he said.
He also urged children and father -in -laws living in the household should not be excluded from the list.
Published – May 11, 2025 06:44
