The document summarizes key findings from the 2011 Socio Economic Caste Census (SECC) of rural India. It finds that: 1) Of the 17.91 crore rural households surveyed, 7.05 crore (39.39%) were excluded from being considered deprived based on assets owned. 2) Of the remaining 10.69 crore households, 8.69 crore (51.14%) reported experiencing at least one form of deprivation. 3) The data suggests the Food Security Act and Land Acquisition Act passed by the previous government may have been too broad, and could benefit from modifications to better target actual deprived households.

1. AN INITIATIVE OF SHIVNANDANI INDUSTRIES PVT LTD AND JAGDAMB JANAKI NAWAL JANAKI
SOCIETY
Socio Economic status of Rural India
CompiledbyCol Mukteshwar Prasad(Retd), MTech,CE(I),FIE(I),FIETE,FISLE,FInstOD,AMCSI
Contact -9007224278, e-mail –muktesh_prasad@yahoo.co.in
for book ”DecodingServicesSelectionBoard”(CO-AuthoredbyanIO Naval Board CMDE C S AZAD AND
PsychologistCol Mukteshwar Prasad,ex 24 SSB) and SSB guidance and training at Shivnandani Edu and
Defence Academy
(Only book in covering the expected new technique in SSB)
7/4/2015

2. Socio Economic Status of Rural India
SECC-2011 is a study of socio economic status of rural and urban households and allows
ranking of households based on predefined parameters. SECC 2011 has three census
components which were conducted by three separate authorities but under the overall
coordination of Department of Rural Development in the Government of India. Census in
Rural Area has been conducted by the Department of Rural Development (DoRD). Census
in Urban areas is under the administrative jurisdiction of the Ministry of Housing and
Urban Poverty Alleviation (MoHUPA). Caste Census is under the administrative control of
Ministry of Home Affairs: Registrar General of India (RGI) and Census Commissioner of
India.
Ministry of Rural Development commenced the Socio-Economic Caste Census-2011 on 29th
June, 2011 through a comprehensive door to door enumeration across the country. The data of
the exercise is now available for policy, research and for implementing various development
programmes. The following needs to be consciously taken on record while using SECC data.
The status of SECC as on 27.06.2015 is as under
i. Districts Covered 640
ii. Enumeration Completed 640
iii. Verification Completed 640
iv. Draft List Published 628
v. Final List Published 277
vi. Final List Published of States 13 States/ UTs
vii. States Ready to Publish Final List 21 States/UT
-Claims & Objections Invited & Resolved 99.66%
viii. Draft List Awaited 12
-NCT Delhi 9/9
-Himachal Pradesh 1/12
-Maharashtra 2/ 35

3. I - Key Findings from Rural India
1. Total Households in the Country (Rural plus Urban)
24.39
Crore
2. Total Rural Households
17.91
Crore
3.Total Excluded Households (based on fulfilling any of the 14 parameters of
exclusion – 7.05Crore(39.39%)
i. motorized 2/3/4 wheeler/fishing boat.
ii. Mechanized 3-4 wheeler agricultural equipment.
iii. Kisan credit card with credit limit of over Rs. 50,000/-.
iv. Household member government employee.
v. households with non-agricultural enterprises registered with government.
vi. Any member of household earning more than Rs. 10,000 per month.
vii. Paying income tax.
viii. Paying professional tax.
ix. 3 or more rooms with pucca walls and roof.
x. owns a refrigerator.
xi. Owns landline phone.
xii. Owns more than 2.5 acres of irrigated land with 1 irrigation equipment.
xiii. 5 acres or more of irrigated land for two or more crop season.
xiv. Owning at least 7.5 acres of land or more with at least one irrigation
equipment.
4. Automatically included (based on fulfilling any of the 5 parameters of inclusion - i.
Households without shelter. ii. Destitute, living on alms. iii. Manual scavenger
families. iv. Primitive tribal groups. v. legally released bonded labour.
16.50
lakh
0.92%
5. Households considered for deprivation
10.69
Crore
6. Households not reporting deprivation
2.00
crore

4. 7. Households with any one of the 7 deprivation
8.69
Crore
II - Deprivation Data
D1. Households with one or less room, kuccha walls and kuccha roof
2.37 Crore
13.25%
D2. No adult member in household between age 18 and 59
65.15 lakh
3.64%
D3. Female headed household with no adult male member between 16 and 59
68.96
Lakh
3.85%
D4.
Households with differently able member with no other able bodied adult
member
7.16 lakh
0.40%
D5. SC/ST Households
3.86 Crore
21.53%
D6. Households with no literate adult above age 25 years
4.21 Crore
23.52%
D7. Landless households deriving a major part of their income from manual labour
5.37 Crore
29.97%
III - Sources of Household income
1. Total Rural Households 17.91Crore
2. Cultivation
5.39 Crore
(30.10% )
3. Manual Casual labour
9.16 Crore
(51.14% )
4. Part time or full time domestic service 44.84 lakh

5. (2.50% )
5. Rag picking, etc.
4.08 lakh
(0.23% )
6. Non Agricultural own account enterprise
28.87 lakh
(1.61%)
7. Begging/charity/alms
6.68 lakh
(0.37% )
8.
Others ( including government service, private service, PSU employment,
etc.
2.50 Crore
14.01%
Socio-economic survey data show UPA's food and land bills were misdirected
A quick look at the first-cut results of the government’s socio-economic and caste census
(SECC 2011) shows that that some of the populist UPA schemes like the Food Security Act and
the Land Acquisition Act were too wide in their scope to be justified and make a good case for
either scrapping or seriously modifying both laws.
The Food Security Act promises two-thirds of Indian households rice, wheat and coarse grains at
Rs 3, Rs 2 and Re 1 a kg. It is yet to be brought into force as many states have not finished
identifying eligible households. The Act is intended to cover over 80 crore Indians (over 16 crore
households), but the socio-economic census shows that that many people cannot simply be
considered poor enough to be eligible. Most of it would have been money down the drain, even
assuming there were no leakages.
Here's why. Of the 17.91 crore rural households covered, 7.05 crore households were
automatically excluded from being considered socio-economically backward based on what they
own or use or earn (see list at the bottom of this article). Of another lot of 10.69 crore households
tentatively slotted as deprived in some form or the other, two crore households themselves
reported no sense of deprivation. That left 8.69 crore households who could be considered socio-
economically deprived, and hence worthy of special anti-poverty efforts or targeting.
Under the Food Security Act, 75 percent of rural households would have been considered
deprived and eligible for super-subsidised food supplies – about 13.4 crore households.
But as the socio-economic census shows, the actual number of deprived households is 8.69 crore
– more than a third less than what was proposed to be covered by the Food Security Act (FSA),
Even if one were to accept that the people intended to be covered by the FSA are not the same

6. people now considered deprived under the socio-economic census, clearly the FSA would have
thrown money at people who didn’t need its benefits.
The UPA scheme was clearly hopelessly irresponsible.
The case for scrapping and/or modifying the Food Security Act is thus proven. Ideally, it should
be scrapped. The benefits of this saving can be given to the poor identified in the socio-economic
census in cash through the direct benefits transfers scheme. The FSA clearly needs to be
amended in the short term to exclude hordes of the ineligible.
Next, consider the Land Acquisition Act. The UPA’s version, which would make land
acquisition very expensive and time-consuming, is predicated on the belief that farmers will be
big losers.
The socio-economic data for rural India provided by the census shows that cultivation (which
could be used as a proxy for land-owning farmers) provides incomes to barely 5.39 crore
households – about 30 percent of the total. Manual casual labour accounts for the overwhelming
bulk of 9.16 crore households – over 51 percent. A good 14 percent – 2.5 crore households –
have public or private employment.
The NDA-modified Land Acquisition Act is intended to make acquisitions easier for specific
purposes (industrial corridors, rural roads, homes, etc), but the fact is more than two-thirds of
rural households – nearly 70 percent – do not derive major incomes from cultivation or land
ownership. They will not be affected by any changes in the land acquisition act, unless the
impact is directly on farm labour employment.
Put another way, 70 percent of rural India needs jobs rather than land for its well-being. And
these jobs will not come unless land is used for building infrastructure, homesteads, and social
infrastructure like schools and hospitals.
The socio-economic survey thus suggests that whatever the deleterious effects of compulsory
land acquisition, its benefits may well outweigh any loss to landowners, as long as the
compensation is not swallowed up by the bureaucracy or other forms of skullduggery.
If the NDA can refashion the Land Acquisition Act not as a land-grab effort on behalf of the
rich, but as a bid to create jobs and enhance farm incomes through higher productivity, it should
develop political traction of its own.
Data for urban India, which involves mapping the socio-economic status of another 7.48 million
households, will be released later.
Note: The criteria for exclusion in the socio-economic census (meaning, those not considered
entitled for major anti-poverty efforts) included the following: (i) ownership of motorised 2/3/4
wheeler or fishing boat; (ii) mechanised 3–4 wheeler agricultural equipment; (iii) kisan credit
card with credit limit of over Rs 50,000; (iv) household member who is a government employee;
(v) households with non-agricultural enterprises registered with government; (vi) any member of

7. household earning more than Rs 10,000 a month; (vii) anyone paying income tax; (viii) anyone
paying professional tax; (ix) ownership of three or more rooms with pucca walls and roof; (x)
ownership of a refrigerator; (xi) ownership of a landline phone; (xii) ownership of more than 2.5
acres of irrigated land with one irrigation equipment; (xiii) ownership of five acres or more of
irrigated land for two or more crop seasons; and (xiv) ownership of at least 7.5 acres of land or
more with at least one irrigation equipment.
Over one-third population in rural India illiterate: Socio-economic census
Over one-third of Indian population living in rural areas is illiterate even after 68 years of
independence, according to the Socio Economic and Caste Census (SECC) 2011.
Around 64 percent of the rural Indian population is literate, the Census data showed.
Rajasthan leads the pack of illiterate states with 47.58 percent of its population falling in that
category, followed by Madhya Pradesh with 44.19 percent of its people in rural areas being
illiterate.
Bihar is at the third place with 43.85 percent and followed by newly carved state Telangana with
40.42 percent population belonging to this category.
However, the most literate state of Kerala has only 11.38 percent population falling under the
illiterate category.
After Kerala, Goa has the least illiterate population with 15.42 percent and Sikkim at the third
spot with 20.12 percent.
Himachal Pradesh has also done well in terms of improving its literacy rate. The state has only
22.05 percent illiterate population.
All India average of the population having below primary education is 13.97 percent, while
middle education pass out is 13.53 percent.
The percentage of graduate and higher education is only 3.45 percent across the country.
However, Goa is ahead of Kerala in term of population with graduate and above education
qualification. While Kerala only has 7.75 percent falling in that category, 9.48 percent Goa's
population is graduate and above.