Assessment of Hydrogeological Reports for DLI #1

ATAL BHUJAL YOJANA (Atal Jal) Assessment of Hydrogeological Reports for DLI #1

QUALITY COUNCIL OF INDIA

Report detailing the assessment methodology, observations and recommendations with respect to the Hydrogeological Reports (2020-21) under DLI #1.

INDEX PART 1: INTRODUCTION ...... 5 1.1 Hydrogeological Reports ...... 6 1.2 Evaluation of Hydrogeological Reports ...... 6 PART 2: BLOCK-WISE HYDROGEOLOGICAL REPORTS ...... 10 2.1 Gujarat ...... 11 2.1.1 Gandhinagar...... 11 2.2 Karnataka...... 14 2.2.1 Bangarpet ...... 15 2.2.2 Challekere ...... 18 2.2.3 Chitradurga ...... 21 2.2.4 Devanahalli ...... 24 2.2.5 Doddaballapura ...... 27 2.2.6 Gagad ...... 30 2.2.7 Gundlupet ...... 33 2.2.8 Hiriyur ...... 36 2.2.9 Holalkere ...... 39 2.2.10 Hosadurga ...... 42 2.2.11 Hoskote ...... 45 2.2.12 Kadur ...... 48 2.2.13 Kanakapura ...... 51 2.2.14 Kolar ...... 54 2.2.15 Malur ...... 58 2.2.16 Mulbagal ...... 61 2.2.17 Nelamangala ...... 64 2.2.18 Ron ...... 67 2.2.19 Srinivaspura ...... 70 2.2.20 Ramanagara ...... 74 2.3 Madhya Pradesh ...... 77 2.3.1 Ajaygarh ...... 77 2.3.2 Baldeogarh ...... 80 2.3.3 Chhatarpur ...... 83 2.3.4 Niwari ...... 86 2.3.5 Nowgong ...... 89 2.3.6 Palera ...... 92 1

2.3.7 Pathariya ...... 95 2.3.8 Rajnagar ...... 98 2.3.9 Sagar ...... 101 2.4 Maharashtra...... 104 2.4.1 Amalner ...... 105 2.4.2 Baramati...... 109 2.4.3 Chakur ...... 112 2.4.4 Chandurbazar ...... 115 2.4.5 Deola ...... 118 2.4.6 Ghansavangi ...... 121 2.4.7 Jalna ...... 124 2.4.8 Jat ...... 127 2.4.9 Karjat ...... 130 2.4.10 Katol ...... 133 2.4.11 Kavathe Mahankal ...... 136 2.4.12 Khanapur ...... 139 2.4.13 Khatav ...... 142 2.4.14 Latur ...... 145 2.4.15 Madha ...... 148 2.4.16 Malsiras ...... 151 2.4.17 Man ...... 154 2.4.18 Mohol ...... 157 2.4.19 Morshi ...... 160 2.4.20 Motala ...... 163 2.4.21 Narkhed ...... 166 2.4.22 Nilanga...... 169 2.4.23 Osmanabad ...... 172 2.4.24 Pandharpur ...... 175 2.4.25 Parola ...... 178 2.4.26 Partur ...... 181 2.4.27 Purandhar ...... 184 2.4.28 Rahata ...... 187 2.4.29 Raver ...... 191 2.4.30 Sangamner ...... 194 2

2.4.31 Sinnar ...... 197 2.4.32 Tasgaon ...... 200 2.4.33 Umarga ...... 203 2.4.34 Wai ...... 206 2.4.35 Warud ...... 209 2.4.36 Yawal ...... 212 2.4.37 Indapur ...... 215 2.4.38 Renapur ...... 218 2.5 Uttar Pradesh ...... 221 2.5.1 Babina ...... 222 2.5.2 Barokhar Khurd ...... 226 2.5.3 Baghpat ...... 229 2.5.4 Budhana ...... 233 2.5.5 Charkhari ...... 236 2.5.6 Jaitpur ...... 239 2.5.7 Jaspura ...... 242 2.5.8 Kabrai ...... 245 2.5.9 Kandhala ...... 248 2.5.10 Karvi ...... 251 2.5.11 Kharkhoda ...... 254 2.5.12 Mahuva ...... 257 2.5.13 Manikpur ...... 260 2.5.14 Mau ...... 263 2.5.15 Maudaha ...... 266 2.5.16 Mauranipur ...... 269 2.5.17 Muskara ...... 272 2.5.18 Naraini ...... 276 2.5.19 Panwari ...... 279 2.5.20 Pilana ...... 282 2.5.21 Rajpura...... 285 2.5.22 Ramnagar ...... 288 2.5.23 Sarila ...... 291 2.5.24 Sumerpur ...... 295 2.5.25 Talbehat ...... 298 3

2.5.26 Tindwari...... 301 PART 3: STATE SPECIFIC OBSERVATIONS ...... 304 3.1 Gujarat ...... 305 3.2 Karnataka ...... 305 3.3 Madhya Pradesh ...... 306 3.4 Maharashtra ...... 306 3.5 Uttar Pradesh ...... 309 PART 4: IDEAL HYDROGEOLOGICAL REPORT ...... 311

Part 1: Introduction

1.1 Hydrogeological Reports

The Hydrogeological Report is a sub indicator under DLI#1 and serves the purpose of data dissemination in the form of compilation of information pertaining to the block, apart from the data disclosed for Water Level (WL) and Water Quality (WQ) in the MIS. There were a total of 94 Hydrogeological Reports which were disclosed by five out of seven states which fall within the extent of Atal Bhujal Yojana, the details of which have been discussed below:

Table 1: Details of number of Hydrogeological Reports submitted by states

State Number of Hydrogeological Reports submitted Gujarat 1 Karnataka 20 Madhya 9 Pradesh Maharashtra 38

Uttar 26 Pradesh

Block-level Hydrogeological Reports were assessed/verified based on their completeness in terms of different parameters as per the content of the reports. Broadly, the reports consist of three major sections viz. Basic Information, Maps, and Tables which is in accordance with the information that the states were required to reveal under DLI#1 of Atal Bhujal Yojana. Accordingly, the following key parameters were dewised against which scores were allotted:

Table 2: Allocation of scores in assessing Hydrogeological Reports

Parameter Number of sub-parameters for Weightage allotted to each sub- Total Score scoring parameter Allotted Basic 10 0.5 5 Information Maps 6 1.5 9 Tables (I, II, III) 3 2 6 Grand Total 20

Only those block reports that are ‘Complete’ in all aspects as required, and attain a score of 20 were considered for disbursement of incentives against this indicator.

1.2 Evaluation of Hydrogeological Reports a. Basic Information The scoring was done based on availability of information within a sub-parameter. In case a sub-parameter was mentioned, but no supporting inputs were provided with it, the scoring was affected accordingly. For a report that had all the ten sub-parameters mentioned correctly with the accompanying information, this parameter was given a score of 5/5. b. Maps The scoring was done based on availability and correctness of the map. A total of 7 maps were available: 6 compulsory and 1 optional. In cases where the map did not pertain to the sub-parameters, the scores were affected. Wherever a map could be better in terms of readability and the information that it provides, the same was noted, though not considered for scoring. The availability of the seventh optional map did not affect the scores in DLI#1. 6

For a report that had all the 6 compulsory maps complete and correct, this parameter was given a score of 9/9. c. Tables There were three Tables, each of which carried a score of 2. Table 1 specified whether the wells in each block were monitored for water level or water quality, and was also considered as the superset for Tables 2 and 3. The wells which were mentioned in Table 1 for WL and WQ should ideally have been present in Tables 2 and 3 as well. If Table 1, however, did not specify whether a well was being monitored for WL or WQ, it was not considered as the superset and Tables 2 and 3 were used to identify these wells. In case Tables 2 and 3 had more wells than what was mentioned in Table 1, the same was flagged in the assessment reports. The wells in all the Tables were compared on the basis of Well ID, Village Name, Site Name or GP, whichever was available. A threshold of 40% was set at each step of the HGR assessment, and scores were affected in case the 40% criterion did not match. Discrepancies that did not affect this criterion, however, did not affect the scores either. All the discrepancies observed, were noted in the assessment for subsequent improvement. For a report that had all the 3 Tables complete, this parameter was given a score of 6/6. The assessment methodology of Tables has been detailed below:

Part 2: Block-wise Hydrogeological Reports

2.1 Gujarat

Basic S.no State Block Information Maps Tables Total Score Status 1 Gujarat Gandhinagar 5 6 4 15 Incomplete

2.1.1 Gandhinagar

State Gujarat District Gandhinagar Block Gandhinagar

Basic Information (5/5)

Serial number Demographics Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete 4 Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Complete 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Ground Water Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (6/9)

Available/Not Serial Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Map showing the Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk is completely 2 Not Available missing. Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm Map showing the Electrical at 25 degree Celsius) in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Available

Tables (4 /6)

Most of the wells present in HGR match with the wells in MIS except for 5 wells. These are 4 CGWB WL wells with village names - Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed Chiloda_Pz_II, Pethapur_Pz-II, Sardhav Pz-II and in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared Kasturinagar (IFFCO) which are not found in MIS with MIS and 1 SGWB well Medra. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, The latitude and longitude match perfectly between and compared with MIS MIS and HGR. Well ID for CGWB wells is not given in MIS, Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed hence, verification of data is difficult. Also, one in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with SGWB well data is not available in the MIS. This is MIS GNDPZ-130 (Village Name - Medra). The wells which are present in MIS are not Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) necessarily found in HGR.

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (0/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Table Number of SGWB Wells which are present in 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 4 0 Other Parameters There is discrepancy in the data available for CGWB wells present in Tables 1 and 2. All 4 CGWB wells that are available in Table 1 are Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed missing in Table 2. 1 well has been matched on the in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Level) and basis of village name (Pethapur_Pz-II) but their Table 2 Well IDs are different. The data in MIS and HGR does not match, since some data points are jumbled in the HGR; most of Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon the wells do not match data for any 4 years with the Water Level Data given in HGR and compared with MIS, hence this parameter is considered not MIS. complete. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Table Number of SGWB Wells which are present in 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 1 Other Parameters There is no CGWB well in Table 1 for WQ. All, Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed but one SGWB well with well ID - GNDPZ - 130 in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and (village name - Medra) is found in Table 3 that Table 3 were present in Table 1. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC/TDS data is available in HGR. Water Quality data for Gandhinagar block is not Comments and/or remarks for Cations/Anions data available in the MIS, hence the data available in given in HGR and compared with MIS. HGR cannot be analysed and verified. The EC/TDS data for all the wells are absent in MIS hence the verification of this data is not Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) possible.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (15).

2.2 Karnataka

S.no State Block Basic Information Maps Tables Total Score Status 1 Karnatka Bangarpet 5 9 6 20 Complete 2 Karnatka Challakere 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 3 Karnatka Chitradurga 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 4 Karnatka Devanahalli 5 9 6 20 Complete 5 Karnatka Dodaballapura 5 9 6 20 Complete 6 Karnatka Gadag 5 9 6 20 Complete 7 Karnatka Gundlupet 5 9 6 20 Complete 8 Karnatka Hiriyur 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 9 Karnatka Holalkere 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 10 Karnatka Hosadurga 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 11 Karnatka Hoskote 5 9 6 20 Complete 12 Karnatka Kadur 5 9 6 20 Complete 13 Karnatka Kanakapura 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 14 Karnatka Kolar 5 9 6 20 Complete 15 Karnatka Mulbagal 5 9 6 20 Complete 16 Karnatka Srinivaspura 5 9 6 20 Complete 17 Karnatka Malur 5 9 6 20 Complete 18 Karnatka Nelamangala 5 9 6 20 Complete 19 Karnatka Ron 5 9 6 20 Complete 20 Karnatka Ramanagara 5 9 6 20 Complete

2.2.1 Bangarpet

State Karnataka District Kolar Block Bangarpet

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ 6 cm at 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All wells (for WL) match perfectly between Table Level) and Table 2 1 and Table 2. The wells in Gollhalli and Kyasamballi have given data for pre and post monsoon water level which is not consistent with MIS, even after considering the Parapet height. The well in Gattimadamangala has given mismatching post Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post monsoon water level data for the year 2015. Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and WL data is not available in the MIS for 8 wells compared with MIS. which are found in HGR. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All wells present in Table 1(for WQ) match Quality) and Table 3 perfectly with Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The WQ data for all the 18 SGWB wells is not available in the MIS, since MIS only gives data for CGWB wells. Hence, comparison cannot be Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) done.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.2 Challekere

State Karnataka District Chitradurga Block Challakere

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels and water quality 3 Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm 6 at 25 degree Celsius) in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 )

Other Parameters 7 village names that are found in HGR are Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies missing from MIS. HGR has a total of 15 wells observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and for WL, whereas MIS WL data sheet consists of 3 compared with MIS CGWB wells and 8 SGWB wells, a total of 11. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Latitude and longitude for all the wells match observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as perfectly except for 7 wells which are missing in given in HGR, and compared with MIS MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS 7 Well IDs are missing from MIS. MIS WL data sheet does not consist of 7 wells with well IDs - 70102, 70108, 70127, 70128, Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) 70129, 70130, 70131.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. NA NA Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and Table 3 Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

2.2.3 Chitradurga

State Karnataka District Chitradurga Block Chitradurga

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ 6 cm at 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2) Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 12 0 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Data for 4 wells is missing from MIS WL sheet; observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and with village names - Chitradurga, Sirigere, compared with MIS Guddadarangvvanahalli and Bommakkanahalli. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Latitude and longitude for all wells match observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as perfectly except for 4 wells which are absent in given in HGR, and compared with MIS MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and 4 well are missing from MIS with well IDs - compared with MIS 070223, 070224, 070225 and 070216. There are 4 wells in the HGR which are not present in the MIS. The source of data for these Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) wells should be verified.

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

2.2.4 Devanahalli

State Karnataka District Bangalore Rural Block Devanahalli

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 6 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2)

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS The village Jyothipura is not found in MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitude and longitudes for one well is not found given in HGR, and compared with MIS in the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS 1 well with well ID - 10505 is missing in MIS. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) 1 well is missing in MIS, that is, Jyothipura.

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and Table 3 Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The MIS WQ data sheet consists only of CGWB wells and HGR has only SGWB wells being monitored for water quality. Hence, the Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) authenticity of data cannot be checked.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.5 Doddaballapura

State Karnataka District Bangalore Rural Block Doddaballapura

Basic Information (5/5)

Serial number Demographic Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete 4 Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Complete 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Ground Water Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not Number available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels and water quality 3 Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ 6 cm at 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 )

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There are 3 villages with village name Sasalu, observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Tubugere and Vanigarahalli that are missing in compared with MIS the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The Latitude and Longitudes are not available in observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as MIS for 3 wells. For all other wells, the data given in HGR, and compared with MIS matches perfectly. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and There are 3 wells missing in MIS with well IDs - compared with MIS 10613D, 10614 and 10615. Details of 3 wells in the villages Sasalu, Tubugere Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) and Vanigarahalli are missing from the MIS.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and Table 3 Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The MIS WQ data sheet consists only of CGWB wells and HGR has only SGWB wells being monitored for water quality. Hence, the Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) authenticity of data cannot be checked

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.6 Gagad

State Karnataka District Gadag Block Gadag

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm 6 at 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 )

Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 6 0 6 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Two of the village names (Papanashi, Yalishirur) compared with MIS which are present in HGR are not found in MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitude and longitude is missing in the MIS for 2 given in HGR, and compared with MIS wells: 90303 and 090308. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) There are 2 wells missing in MIS.

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells present in Table 1 (for WL) match Level) and Table 2 perfectly with Table 2. There are 2 wells in the HGR which are not present in MIS (village name - Papanash and Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Yalishirur). The other 4 wells, which match Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and between HGR and MIS have consistent and compared with MIS. correct data for Water Level. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells in Table 1(for WQ) match perfectly Quality) and Table 3 with Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. MIS water quality data consist only of CGWB data. Since the wells which are given in the HGR are all SGWB wells, these wells cannot be matched between the HGR and MIS, and the Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) authenticity of the data cannot be checked.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.7 Gundlupet

State Karnataka District Chamarajanagara Block Gundlupet

Basic Information (5/5)

Serial Demographic number Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete 4 Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Complete 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Ground Water Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (9/9)

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 9 0 9 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Three wells with Village names - observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Bheemanabeedu, Terakanambi and Hasaguli are compared with MIS missing from the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The latitude and Longitude match perfectly for observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as the given wells except for the 3 wells which are given in HGR, and compared with MIS missing from MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and 3 wells with Well ID- 15201HP, 150208, compared with MIS 150203 are missing from the MIS. 3 wells are completely missing in the MIS - Terakanambi (150203), Bheemanabeedu (15201HP), Hasaguli (150208) which makes the Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) comparison impossible.

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 (WL) Level) and Table 2 are found in Table 2. There are three wells in the HGR which do not Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post match with the MIS. The water level data for Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and wells that match between HGR and MIS are compared with MIS. perfectly consistent between HGR and MIS. No CGWB Wells were available in the HGR for water level. 3 wells are completely missing in the MIS -Terakanambi (150203), Bheemanabeedu Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) (15201HP), Hasaguli (150208).

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 for WQ Quality) and Table 3 are found in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Since the MIS WQ sheet gives data for only Water Quality of CGWB wells, and the wells mentioned in the HGR WQ are all SGWB wells, Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) the authenticity of the data cannot be checked.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.8 Hiriyur

State Karnataka District Chitradurga Block Hiriyur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 6 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (4/6)

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 (WL) Level) and Table 2 are present in Table 2. There are three wells in the HGR which are Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post missing in MIS. The water level data for wells Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and which match between HGR and MIS are perfectly compared with MIS. consistent between HGR and MIS. There are 3 wells Bharamagiri (070503), Ikkanur (070526) and Javanagonda (070527) missing in Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) MIS WL data sheet.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and Table 3 Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

2.2.9 Holalkere

State Karnataka District Chitradurga Block Holalkere

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 6 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 12 0 0 0 Other Parameters 6 wells with village name - Arehallihatti, Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Kummanaghatti (Open well), Holalkere, observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Chikkjajaur, Ramgiri, Talya are missing from compared with MIS MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitude and longitude for all wells match given in HGR, and compared with MIS perfectly except for 6 wells. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and 6 wells with well ID - 070616, 070607, 070619, compared with MIS 070620, 070621, 070622. 6 wells are missing from MIS - Arehallihatti (070616), Kummanaghatti (Open well) (070607), Holalkere (070619), Chikkjajaur (070620), Ramgiri (070621) and Talya Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) (070622).

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

2.2.10 Hosadurga

State Karnataka District Chitradurga Block Hosadurga

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring 3 water levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ 6 cm at 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (4/6)

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 (WL) Level) and Table 2 are found in Table 2. Three out of ten wells present in HGR are not found in the MIS. The seven wells which match Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post between HGR and MIS have provided consistent Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and data points for pre and post monsoon between compared with MIS. HGR and MIS. Data for 3 wells – Narasipura (Open Well) (070712), Devigere (070725) and Hosadurga Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) (070726) is missing in MIS.

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and Table 3 Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18). 44

2.2.11 Hoskote

State Karnataka District Bangalore Rural Block Hoskote

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 6 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitude & Longitude of three wells has not been given in HGR, and compared with MIS found with the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and 3 wells with well IDs - 10703, 10713 and 10721 compared with MIS are missing in MIS. 3 wells are missing in MIS Anugondanahalli (10703), Hindiganalu (10713) and Upparahalli Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) (10721).

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 for WL Level) and Table 2 are present in Table 2. Three wells which are mentioned in the HGR are not found in the MIS. Two of the wells which Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post match between the HGR and MIS have pre and Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and post monsoon water levels which match perfectly compared with MIS. between the MIS and HGR. 3 wells are missing in MIS - Anugondanahalli (10703), Hindiganalu (10713) and Upparahalli Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) (10721).

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells present in Table 1(for WQ) match Quality) and Table 3 perfectly with Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS.

The data for the year 2019 is mentioned twice in HGR for village Hoskote (10722). Also, the data is missing for the year 2015 & 2016 for the same Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) well.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.12 Kadur

State Karnataka District Chikamaglur Block Kadur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels 3 and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 6 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 13 0 13 0 Other Parameters 3 wells with village names - Kadurhalli, Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Annegere, Yagati are missing in the MIS. One observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and village with well ID 60202 New has a different compared with MIS village name in MIS, that is, Birur. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Latitude and Longitude for all the wells match observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as perfectly between HGR and MIS except for 3 given in HGR, and compared with MIS village which are missing in MIS. There are 2 wells mentioned in the HGR for village name- Kadurhalli, but only well with Well ID 60201 is available in the MIS. The Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies other well with the Well ID 60220 is missing. observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and 3 wells with well ID - 60220, 60221, and 60222 compared with MIS are missing in MIS. 3 wells are missing from MIS, that is, Kadurhalli Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) (60220), Yagati (60221) and Annagere (60222).

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All wells present in Table 1 (for WL) are present Level) and Table 2 in Table 2.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post All other 10 wells which match between the MIS Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and and HGR have perfectly consistent water level compared with MIS. data between HGR and MIS. 3 wells are missing from MIS, that is, Kadurhalli Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) (60220), Yagati (60221) and Annagere (60222).

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells present in Table 1 (for WQ) are Quality) and Table 3 present in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given Data for EC/TDS is not available in MIS. Hence, in HGR and compared with MIS. authenticity of the data cannot be checked.

Data for WQ for SGWB wells is not available in Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data the MIS. Hence, the cation/anion data could not given in HGR and compared with MIS. be checked. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.13 Kanakapura

State Karnataka District Ramanagara Block Kanakapura

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 6 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Table (4/6)

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Latitude is matching but the longitude of village observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as name Yeramgere 7.3 in HGR which is not correct given in HGR, and compared with MIS as per the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and 6 wells are missing in MIS with Well IDs 10802, compared with MIS 10805, 10808, 10813, 10815, 10816. 6 wells are missing from MIS - Doddamaralavadi (10802), Hosadurga (10805), Kabbalu (10808), Sathnur (10813), Thimmasandra (10815), Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) Tuppaganahalli (10816).

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 0/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the well ids given in Table-1 for Water level is Level) and Table 2 there in Table-2 Out of 13 wells which are present in Table 2, only 7 wells are found in the MIS. Further, out of these 7 wells, the pre and post-monsoon water level data does not match for the wells 10801, 10804 D, Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post 10817, 10818 for some years between 2014-2019. Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and The inconsistency remains even after taking the compared with MIS. pedestal height into consideration. 6 wells are missing from MIS - Doddamaralavadi (10802), Hosadurga (10805), Kabbalu (10808), Sathnur (10813), Thimmasandra (10815), Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) Tuppaganahalli (10816).

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 1 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The well 10815 (village name - Thimmasandra) is observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water not found in Table 3 but is present in Table 1 (for Quality) and Table 3 WQ). Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18). 53

2.2.14 Kolar

State Karnataka District Kolar Block Kolar

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels 3 and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 6 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 )

Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 17 4 17 4

Other Parameters Village names of 10 wells out of 21 are missing in the MIS. All 4 CGWB wells with village names - Dalasanur, Kolar, Manighatta, Thoradevandahalli are missing from WL MIS data sheet. 6 SGWB Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies wells are missing are missing from MIS WL data observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and sheet - Thambihalli, Ajjappanahalli, Madivala, compared with MIS Vemgal, Muduvathi, Annihalli Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitude and Longitude of 10 out of 21 wells are given in HGR, and compared with MIS not present in the MIS. 6 SGWB wells with Well IDs - 130710, 130701, 130707, 130711, 130713, 130716 and 4 CGWB Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies wells with Well IDs - W131630078001001, observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and W130730078073001, W131044078132001, compared with MIS W131003078085801 are missing in MIS. 4 CGWB wells that are present for WL in Table 1 are not found in the MIS WL datasheet (Dalasanur -W131630078001001, Kolar - W130730078073001, Manighatta - W131044078132001, Thoradevandahalli - W131003078085801). 6 SGWB wells which are present in Table 1 for WL are not found in MIS WL data sheet. (Thambihalli -130710, Ajjappanahalli - 130701, Madivala - 130707, Vemgal - 130711, Muduvathi Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) - 130713, Annihalli - 130716).

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 Number of SGWB Wells which are present (for WL) but absent in Table 2. in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Level) and All the wells present in Table1 (WL) match Table 2 perfectly with Table 2. Out of 21 wells that matched between Tables 1 and 2, only 11 wells are found in the MIS. The pre and post monsoon water level data does not match between the HGR and MIS for the well IDs 130709 and 130715, even after the parapet height is Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon taken into consideration. Water Level Data given in HGR and compared with Data mismatch found for 2 wells - Sugutur MIS. (130709) and Huthur (130715). 10 wells are missing in the MIS WL data sheet. 4 CGWB wells that are present for WL in Table 1 are not found in the MIS WL datasheet. 6 SGWB wells which are present in Table 1 for WL are not there in MIS WL data sheet. ( Dalasanur - W131630078001001, Kolar- W130730078073001, Manighatta- W131044078132001, Thoradevandahalli- W131003078085801, Thambihalli -130710 , Ajjappanahalli - 130701 , Madivala - 130707, Vemgal - 130711, Muduvathi - Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) 130713, Annihalli - 130716).

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 4 0

Other Parameters All the SGWB wells (17) present in Table 1 (for WQ) match perfectly with Table 3 of HGR but none of the CGWB wells (4) present in Table1 (for WQ) are there in Table 3. WQ MIS data sheet does not consist of any SGWB wells and also there are different CGWB Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies wells than the ones which are found in Table 1 for observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water CGWB. Hence, the data authenticity has not been Quality) and Table 3 checked. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The CGWB wells (Dalasanur- W131630078001001, Kolar- W130730078073001, Manighatta- W131044078132001, Thoradevandahalli- W131003078085801) not found in Table 3 of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) HGR and also WQ MIS datasheet.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.15 Malur

State Karnataka District Kolar Block Malur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels 3 and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 6 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 14 0 14 0 Other Parameters Village name for 11 out of 14 wells match Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies between HGR and MIS. 3 wells with village observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and names Shivarpatna, Masti, and Nosagere are compared with MIS missing in the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Latitude and longitude match perfectly between observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as HGR and MIS except for the 3 wells that are not given in HGR, and compared with MIS present in the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and 3 wells with well ID 130807, 130804 and compared with MIS 130814 are not present in MIS. 3 wells are missing in MIS WL data sheet - Shivarpatna (130807), Masti (130804), Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) Nosagere (130814)

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 are Quality) and Table 3 present in Table 3 for WQ. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.16 Mulbagal

State Karnataka District kolar Block Mulbagal

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels 3 and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 6 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2)

Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 21 0 21 0

Other Parameters There are a total 21 village names given in HGR but only 11 village names given in MIS. Hence, 10 village names present in HGR are not found in the MIS. The missing village names are: Kurudamale; Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Taylur; Mylapur; Kappamadugu; Nangli; observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Hebbani; Musturu; Duggasandra; Huthanur; compared with MIS Devarayasamudra; Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitude and Longitude match perfectly except given in HGR, and compared with MIS for 10 wells which are not present in the MIS. 11 out of 21 wells in HGR match with the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies 10 Missing Well IDs: 130906, 130914, 130911, observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and 130915, 130912, 130904, 130917, 130921, compared with MIS 130922, 130918 10 wells are missing in MIS Kurudamale 130906; Taylur-130914; Mylapur-130911; Kappamadugu-130915; Nangli-130912; Hebbani-130904; Musturu-130917; Duggasandra-130921; Huthanur-130922; Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) Devarayasamudra-130918.

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the Well IDs given in Table-1 for water level Level) and Table 2 are there in Table-2. Out of 21 wells which match between Tables 1 and 2, only 11 wells are found in the MIS. The pre and post monsoon water level data does not match between the HGR and MIS for the Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post wells 130903 and 130908 for some years, even Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and after the parapet height is taken into compared with MIS. consideration. 10 wells are missing in MIS Kurudumale- 130906; Taylur-130914; Mylapur- 130911; Kalamadugu-130915; Nangli-130912; Hebbani- 130904; Musturu-130917; Duggasandra-130921; Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) Kuthanur-130922; Devarayasamudra-130918.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present In Table-1 for water Quality) and Table 3 quality are there in Table-3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of these wells are mentioned Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20). 63

2.2.17 Nelamangala

State Karnataka District Bangalore Rural Block Nelamangala

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels 3 and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 6 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 )

Other Parameters There are 6 village names given in HGR, out of Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies which 3 are missing in the MIS: observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Thonachinakuppe, Mahadevapura, compared with MIS Thyamagondlu. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitude and longitude are perfectly matching given in HGR, and compared with MIS except for the 3 wells which are missing in MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS 3 wells are missing in MIS -Thonachinakuppe (11001), Mahadevapura(11006D), Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) Thyamagondlu (11011).

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the wells present in Table 1 for WQ are found observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water in Table 3, except for one well with well ID - Quality) and Table 3 11011D (Thyamagondlu). Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.18 Ron

State Karnataka District Gadag Block Ron

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels 3 and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 6 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 for WQ Quality) and Table 3 are present in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.19 Srinivaspura

State Karnataka District Kolar Block Srinivaspur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 6 25 degree Celsius) in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 18 0 18 0 Other Parameters There are 18 wells given in HGR but only 11 wells are present in MIS. 7 wells with village name Arikunte, Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Byraganahalli, Dalasanur, Gownipalli, Hosahalli, observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Nelavanki, Veerthimmanahalli are missing from compared with MIS MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Data for 7 wells are missing in MIS Arikunte (131120), Byraganahalli (131124), Dalasanur (131118), Gownipalli (131106), Hosahalli (1311087), Nelavanki (131122), Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) Veerthimmanahalli (131115).

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All wells which are given in Table-1 for water Level) and Table 2 level are there in Table-2. Only 11 wells match between the HGR and MIS out of 18 wells which match between the Table 1 (WL) and Table 2. Out of these 11 wells, only 7 wells have given consistently correct pre and post monsoon water level data. The data for post monsoon water level of the years 2018 and 2019 is consistently wrong for all the wells. The Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post threshold of 40% of wells (which is equivalent to Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and 7 wells) is barely met in this block for Water compared with MIS. Level. Data for 7 wells is missing in MIS Arikunte (131120), Byraganahalli (131124), Dalasanur (131118), Gownipalli (131106), Hosahalli (1311087), Nelavanki (131122), Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) Veerthimmanahalli (131115).

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 under Quality) and Table 3 WQ are present in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.2.20 Ramanagara

State Karnataka District Ramanagara Block Ramanagara

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 6 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells present in Table 1(for WQ) match Quality) and Table 3 perfectly with Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given Data for EC/TDS is not available in MIS; hence in HGR and compared with MIS. authenticity of the data cannot be checked. Data for cation and anion is only available for 1 Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data year in the MIS, hence authenticity for the rest of given in HGR and compared with MIS. the data cannot be checked. According to Table 1, all of the wells were mentioned for WL but in Table 3, these wells were monitored for WQ as well. Since Table 1 is the superset for Tables 2 and 3, any number of WQ wells in Table 3 is redundant because none of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) these wells are mentioned in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.3 Madhya Pradesh

Basic S.no State Block Information Maps Tables Total Score Status Madhya 1 Pradesh Palera 5 9 4 18 Incomplete Madhya 2 Pradesh Ajaygarh 5 9 6 20 Complete Madhya 3 Pradesh Baldeogarh 5 9 4 18 Incomplete Madhya 4 Pradesh Chhatarpur 5 9 4 18 Incomplete Madhya 5 Pradesh Niwari 5 9 6 20 Complete Madhya 6 Pradesh Sagar 5 9 6 20 Complete Madhya 7 Pradesh Nowgong 5 9 4 18 Incomplete Madhya 8 Pradesh Rajnagar 5 9 4 18 Incomplete Madhya 9 Pradesh Pathariya 5 9 6 20 Complete

2.3.1 Ajaygarh

State Madhya Pradesh District Panna Block Ajaygarh

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at The EC Map available mentions 25 degree Celsius) in ground water that it gives the data of pre monsoon EC in groundwater. Going by the same, the post monsoon EC should be given in a separate map; or, only one map for all 12 months should be 6 Available given. Map showing Cross – section of subsurface regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) 7 Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2) Number of Wells

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Level) and Table 2 No discrepancies observed. The Pre and Post monsoon data for PANNA001A- OW, PANNA002A-OW, PANNA071A-OW, PANNA072A-OW, PANNA073A-OW, PANNA074A-OW is completely missing for the year 2015. Pre & Post monsoon data of wells with well ID - W245058080054201 and W245113080104301 is missing for some of the mentioned years. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Data point mismatch found for pre 2018 for 1 well Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and with well ID - W245030080160101 (Village name - compared with MIS. Pandepurwa). Missing data for Water Level should either be given, or the reason for absence of the same should be mentioned. The data mismatch for 2018 should Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) also be rectified.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2) Number of Wells

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.3.2 Baldeogarh

State Madhya Pradesh District Tikamgarh Block Baldeogarh

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not Number available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at The EC Map available 25 in ground water mentions that it gives the data of pre monsoon EC in groundwater. Going by the same, the post monsoon EC should be given in a separate map; or, only one map for all 6 Available 12 months should be given. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (4 /6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 )

Number of Wells

Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There is one village in the HGR (Sarkar) which observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and does not match with the MIS at all; this needs to compared with MIS be rechecked

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitudes match perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between HGR and MIS.

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and One of the wells present in HGR is not there in compared with MIS MIS at all: TKM077-OW

The one missing well from HGR should be Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) mapped and pointed out.

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Level) and Table 2 All the Wells in Table 1 match with Table 2. 2015 Pre and Post Monsoon data needs to be verified; it is missing in the case of the village Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Shivnagar. Additionally, the data for the TKM077- Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and OW well is wrong between MIS and HGR, it needs compared with MIS. correction.

The data mismatch needs to be verified and Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) corrected.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0 /2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 19 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Both the CGWB Wells match between Tables 1 and observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water 3 But Only One well matches between Table 1 and Quality) and Table 3 3, out of 20.

Since, most of the wells in Table 1 and 3 do not Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given match, the authenticity of EC/TDS data has not in HGR and compared with MIS. been verified.

Since, most of the wells in Table 1 and 3 do not Comments and/or remarks for Cation/Anion data match, the authenticity of cation/anion data has not given in HGR and compared with MIS. been verified.

The data for 2015 Water Quality is missing for Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) many of the wells.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

2.3.3 Chhatarpur

State Madhya Pradesh District Chhatarpur Block Chhatarpur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at The EC Map available 25 in ground water mentions that it gives the data of pre monsoon EC in groundwater. Going by the same, the post monsoon EC should be given in a separate map; or, only one map for all 6 Available 12 months should be given. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 15 8 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and One village found in HGR was not found in MIS at compared with MIS all. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS The latitudes and longitudes do not perfectly match with the MIS data given; analysis and comparison Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies is also difficult because of data roundoff, which is a observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as wrong practice for locations given by the latitude given in HGR, and compared with MIS and longitude. It is an erroneous practise. Four of the Wells given in the HGR do not match with any of the wells mentioned in the MIS. Similarly, four wells mentioned in the MIS are Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies missing from the HGR data. This could be a observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and typographical error, but makes those particular compared with MIS wells inaccessible for anyone who reads the report. The data in Table 1 should be thoroughly checked and cross verified with the MIS for typographical errors, latitude and longitude mismatch and Well IDs. Well IDs, being unique numbers assigned to Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) these wells, must not be incorrect.

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) Level) and Table 2 are present in Table 2. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post There are missing data for Pre and Post Monsoon Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and Water levels, specifically for these nine wells compared with MIS. Chhat008-PZ, W244752079293801, W2245100079285101, W245143079230501, W245205079431201, W245400079352801, W245947079390501, W250136079475601, and W245556079351101.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

2.3.4 Niwari

State Madhya Pradesh District Niwari Block Niwari

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at The EC Map available 25 in ground water mentions that it gives the data of pre monsoon EC in groundwater. Going by the same, the post monsoon EC should be given in a separate map; or, only one map for all 6 Available 12 months should be given. Map showing Cross – section of subsurface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2) Number of Wells

No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 19 2 19 2 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and All the villages mentioned in the HGR can be compared with MIS found in the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitudes and longitudes do not have any given in HGR, and compared with MIS discrepancy. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS The source of two wells cannot be determined, if we check MIS and HGR and cross verify one another. The Well IDs need to be thoroughly checked. Two wells in the MIS are also not found in HGR, hence there are 4 wells in total which Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) have discrepancies.

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for All the wells mentioned in Table 1 under WL are WaterLevel) and Table 2 found in Table 2. The Pre and Post Monsoon level data matches Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post between HGR and MIS. The data is missing for the Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and year 2015 of the wells with Well IDs- TKM063A- compared with MIS. OW, TKM066A-OW. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which were found in Table 1 under Quality) and Table 3 WQ are found in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cations or anions given in HGR and compared with MIS. Data of well ID- W25204507848000 is missing for all of the mentioned years. Water Quality data for the year 2015 has not been Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) given for 13 wells.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.3.5 Nowgong

State Madhya Pradesh District Chhatarpur Block Nowgong

Basic Information (5/5)

Serial number Demographics Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete 4 Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Complete 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Groundwater Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of observation wells for monitoring water levels and water 3 quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available Post-monsoon period

5 Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm The EC Map available mentions at 25 in ground water that it gives the data of pre monsoon EC in groundwater. Going by the same, the post monsoon EC should be given in a separate map; or, only one map for all 12 months should be 6 Available given. Map showing Cross – section of subsurface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Observation Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2)

Number of Wells No. of observation wells No. of Observation wells No. of wells under No. of wells under under SGWB for Water under CGWB for Water SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Level Monitoring Level Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 18 5 0 0

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, Two of the villages that are present in MIS are and compared with MIS absent from the HGR report. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude match perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between MIS and HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies One of the observation wells given in the HGR observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and data do not match with the MIS data given. The compared with MIS Well Id is W25024107951 Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Observation Wells which are Number of SGWB Observation Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the observation Wells that are mentioned in Level) and Table 2 Table 1 and present in Table 2. There is data mismatch for Monsoon water levels, specifically for these two wells: W25024107951 Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post AND CHHAT070-OW. The data for CHHAT093- Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and OW is also incorrect because the data matches with compared with MIS. a different well under MIS. The specific data for the Wells mentioned earlier Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) should be checked thoroughly.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Observation Wells which are Number of SGWB Observation Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. NA NA

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and Table 3 Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cations or anions given in HGR and compared with MIS. Since Table 1 is the superset for any HGR report, and Table 1 in this case did not mention any Water Quality Wells at all, the same parameter in Table 3 has not been analyzed. This is irrespective of the fact whether or not Table 3 is complete or otherwise. Table 1 must mention at least some information about Water Quality monitoring. The Water Quality data for the year 2015 has not Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) been given for 5 wells.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18). 91

2.3.6 Palera

State Madhya Pradesh District Tikamgarh Block Palera

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at The EC Map available 25 in ground water mentions that it gives the data of pre monsoon EC in groundwater. Going by the same, the post monsoon EC should be given in a separate map; or, only one map for all 6 Available 12 months should be given. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 17 4 17 4 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and All the villages mentioned in HGR are found in compared with MIS MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS The latitude and longitude information does not match perfectly between MIS and HGR. This is a major issue because the exact location of all the Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies wells is a very important parameter. The location observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as has also been rounded off which is a wrong given in HGR, and compared with MIS practice. Three of the Wells given in the HGR do not match with any of the wells mentioned in the MIS. Similarly, two wells mentioned in the MIS are missing from the HGR data. This could be a typographical error, but makes those particular Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies wells inaccessible for anyone who reads the report. observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and There is also a typo error in TKM 0122A -POW, compared with MIS which should be rectified. The data in Table 1 should be thoroughly checked and cross verified with the MIS for typographical errors, latitude and longitude mismatch and Well IDs. Well IDs, being unique numbers assigned to Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) these wells, must not be incorrect.

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and Table 2 No discrepancy found. Data is missing for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post levels, specifically for these four wells: Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and W250125079133002, W2510125079133002, compared with MIS. W2501125079141501, W250731079054001 There are missing water level data for the year Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) 2015.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0 /2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 2 17 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Only 2 of the CGWB Wells (out of 4) in Table 1, observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water which are for WQ are found in Table 3. All the 17 Quality) and Table 3 SGWB wells are missing from Table 3. Since there is a major discrepancy between the Wells being monitored for Water Quality under the Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given Tables 1 and 3, the authenticity of the TDS/EC data in HGR and compared with MIS. has not been cross verified with MIS. Since there is a major discrepancy between the Wells being monitored for Water Quality under Comments and/or remarks for cations or anions Tables 1 and 3, the authenticity of the cation/anion given in HGR and compared with MIS. data has not been cross verified with MIS. There are several wells in Table 3 which do not specify any 2015 Water Quality data. Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any)

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

2.3.7 Pathariya

State Madhya Pradesh District Damoh Block Pathariya

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at The EC Map available 25 degree Celsius) in ground water mentions that it gives the data of pre monsoon EC in groundwater. Going by the same, the post monsoon EC should be given in a separate map; or, only one map for all 12 months should be 6 Available given. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 14 1 14 1 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and All the villages present in Table 1 of HGR are compared with MIS available in MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS The latitude and longitude match perfectly Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies between MIS and HGR. Except for 1well with a observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as well ID - DAMOH-PZ-07, the origin of which given in HGR, and compared with MIS cannot be determined. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the wells mentioned in Table 1 of HGR are observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and present in the MIS except for DAMOH-PZ-07, compared with MIS the origin of which cannot be determined. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post The well with a well ID - DAMOH-PZ-07 is Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and missing in MIS which makes the comparison of compared with MIS. data points difficult.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the Wells found in Table 1 (for WQ) are Quality) and Table 3 found in Table 3. TDS/EC data for all the wells mentioned in Table 3 is not available in the MIS. Hence, the authenticity of the data cannot be checked for this parameter. The EC/TDS data for year 2015 for 1 CGWB well with a well ID - W235341079114501 (Village Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given Name - Pathariya) is not available in HGR and in HGR and compared with MIS. MIS. The Cation/ Anion data for year 2015 for 1 CGWB well with a well ID - W235341079114501 Comments and/or remarks for actions or anions (Village Name - Pathariya) is not available in given in HGR and compared with MIS. HGR and MIS.

Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any)

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

2.3.8 Rajnagar

State Madhya Pradesh District Chhatarpur Block Rajnagar

Basic Information (5/5)

Serial number Demographic Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete 4 Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Complete 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Groundwater Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water 3 levels and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at The EC Map available 25 in ground water mentions that it gives the data of pre monsoon EC in groundwater. Going by the same, the post monsoon EC should be given in a separate map; or, only one map for all 6 Available 12 months should be given. Map showing Cross – section of subsurface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The Longitude and Latitude of HGR and MIS given in HGR, and compared with MIS are perfectly matching. There are two wells in HGR which do not match with those in MIS. In other words, there are two wells in HGR which we cannot locate within the Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies MIS observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and These two are W2244731079474301 and compared with MIS W245059079555201. The Well IDs should be matched correctly between HGR and MIS. There are some discrepancies in these IDs which should be Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) corrected.

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2.

0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells match between Table 1 (for WL) and Level) and Table 2 Table 2. The Water Level data does not match between HGR and MIS for the following wells: W244730079474301, W244730079474302, W2244731079474301, W245059079555201, Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post W245121079561801 and W245121079561802. Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and This is due to rounded off figures between HGR compared with MIS. and MIS and changes after the decimal points. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. NA NA Other Parameters No data for Water Quality is given within HGR in Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Table 1, which is the superset for Table 3; hence, observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water we cannot compare the data of Table 3 for Quality) and Table 3 authenticity.

Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS.

Comments and/or remarks for Cation/Anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Table 1 is the superset for the entire report. Since WQ information is not given in Table 1, the authenticity of the data was not checked in Table Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) 3.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

100

2.3.9 Sagar

State Madhya Pradesh District Sagar Block Sagar

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels 3 and water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 The EC Map available in ground water mentions that it gives the data of pre monsoon EC in groundwater. Going by the same, the post monsoon EC should be given in a separate map; or, only one map for all 12 months should be 6 Available given. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

101

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitudes and Longitudes almost match, but they given in HGR, and compared with MIS are not 100% accurate. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and One of the wells in HGR does NOT match with compared with MIS that of MIS (SGR024-OW). Table 1 is complete, but there are some discrepancies in the latitude and longitude, which should not be rounded off. Well IDs match in most cases, but there is a major mismatch at one Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) of the places.

102

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells present in Table 1 (for WL) can be Level) and Table 2 found in Table 2. Most of the data of pre and post monsoon water levels match, but there are several instances, where the data either does not match, or is unavailable. There is a possibility that there is a data entry error, but in that case, the data should Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post be thoroughly checked. The data for Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and W235010078424601 and W235010078424602 do compared with MIS. not match at all. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells

Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any)

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

103

2.4 Maharashtra

Total S.no State Block Basic Information Maps Tables Score Status 1 Maharashtra Amalner 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 2 Maharashtra Baramati 5 1.5 6 12.5 Incomplete 3 Maharashtra Chakur 5 7.5 4 16.5 Incomplete 4 Maharashtra Chandurbazaar 5 9 6 20 Complete 5 Maharashtra Deola 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete 6 Maharashtra Ghansavangi 5 9 0 14 Incomplete 7 Maharashtra Indapur 5 6 4 15 Incomplete 8 Maharashtra Jalna 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 9 Maharashtra Jat 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 10 Maharashtra Karjat 4.5 7.5 4 16 Incomplete 11 Maharashtra Katol 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 12 Maharashtra Kavathe 5 9 6 20 Complete 13 Maharashtra Khanapur 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 14 Maharashtra Khatav 5 7.5 4 16.5 Incomplete 15 Maharashtra Latur 5 9 6 20 Complete 16 Maharashtra Madha 5 7.5 4 16.5 Incomplete 17 Maharashtra Malshiras 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete 18 Maharashtra Man 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete 19 Maharashtra Motala 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 20 Maharashtra Mohol 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete 21 Maharashtra Morshi 5 9 0 14 Incomplete 22 Maharashtra Narkhed 5 9 6 20 Complete 23 Maharashtra Nilanga 5 7.5 4 16.5 Incomplete 24 Maharashtra Osmanabad 5 9 6 20 Complete 25 Maharashtra Pandharpur 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete 26 Maharashtra Parola 5 9 6 20 Complete 27 Maharashtra Partur 5 9 6 20 Complete 28 Maharashtra Purandhar 5 6 6 17 Incomplete 29 Maharashtra Rahata 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete 30 Maharashtra Raver 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 31 Maharashtra Renapur 5 9 4 18 Incomplete 32 Maharashtra Sangamner 4.5 7.5 6 18 Incomplete 33 Maharashtra Sinnar 5 7.5 4 16.5 Incomplete 34 Maharashtra Tasgaon 5 9 6 20 Complete 104

35 Maharashtra Umarga 4.5 7.5 4 16 Incomplete 36 Maharashtra Wai 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete 37 Maharashtra Warud 5 9 6 20 Complete 38 Maharashtra Yawal 5 9 4 18 Incomplete

2.4.1 Amalner

State Maharashtra District Jalgaon Block Amalner

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels Information related to Wells and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 6 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

105

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under SGWB No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level for Water Quality CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring 11 3 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Only one village name "Savkheda" cannot be found compared with MIS in MIS, neither under Village Name nor Site Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitudes are matching perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies One of the wells in HGR does not match with any of observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and the Well IDs that are present in MIS. This well is compared with MIS W210800075135001. (It is a CGWB Well) Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

106

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 Number of SGWB Wells which are present in (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Level) and All the wells which are found in Table 1 under Table 2 WL are found in Table 2. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon The 2 wells for CGWB WL in Table 2 have no Water Level Data given in HGR and compared with data mentioned for Pre and Post monsoon water MIS. level. All the wells under CGWB are mentioned in Table 1 are being monitored for WL; but this Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) information has not been mentioned in Table 1.

107

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 Number of SGWB Wells which are present in (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters There are no SGWB Wells mentioned under WQ in Table 1. However, these wells are found in Table 3. The CGWB Wells mentioned under Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed Table 1 do not specify if they are being monitored in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and for WL or WQ. Those wells are found in Table 2 Table 3 (for WL) but are completely absent from Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Since it is not possible to determine if the CGWB Wells are being monitored for WQ or not, the number of missing wells cannot be noted appropriately. Since Table 1 is the superset of the entire report, the wells mentioned should match as well between Table 1 and 3. However, the SGWB wells mention that they are being monitored only for WL; hence, them being present in Table 3 has Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) not been considered.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

108

2.4.2 Baramati

State Maharashtra District Pune Block Baramati

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (1.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk The Hydrogeological Map is 2 Not Available completely missing. Locations of wells for monitoring water Map showing the location of levels and water quality Wells for Water Level and Water 3 Not Available Quality is completely missing. Pre-monsoon period Map showing pre-monsoon Water Level Distribution is 4 Not Available completely missing. Post-monsoon period Map showing post-monsoon Water Level Distribution is 5 Not Available completely missing. Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 degree Celsius) in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

109

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2 )

Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 11 5 0 5 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the Village Names match with the data provided observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and in the MIS; either with the Village Name or the Site compared with MIS Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude match perfectly between given in HGR, and compared with MIS HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS The Well ID in HGR and MIS perfectly match. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

110

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters All the wells which are mentioned in Table 1 under Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies WQ are found in Table 3. One of the wells, observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water however, is extra in Table 3 with a well ID - Quality) and Table 3 W180900074350001. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The SGWB wells mentioned in Table 1 do not specify that they are monitored for WQ at all; however, these wells are found in Table 3. Either Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) the Table 1 or Table 3 needs to be rectified.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (12.5).

111

2.4.3 Chakur

State Maharashtra District Jalna Block Chakur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5 /9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels and water quality Map related to the location of wells to monitor Water level and Water quality is 3 Not Available same as Map 1 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 Map showing the Electrical in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the 6 Available information about wells. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

112

Table (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2)

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed All the village names match between HGR and in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared MIS; when compared with both, the Village with MIS Name and Site Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, The latitude and longitude data matches perfectly and compared with MIS between HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS All the Well IDs match between HGR and MIS. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

113

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Table Number of SGWB Wells which are present in 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters All the wells which are present in Table 1 under WL are found in Table 2. The CGWB Wells, Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed which do not specify if they are being monitored in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Level) and for WL or WQ are also found here through the Table 2 Well IDs. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Table Number of SGWB Wells which are present in 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed Table 3 does not specify any Well ID, the in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and comparison has been done through Village Table 3 Names. The data available for EC is found for only 1 or 2 Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in years, which is an incomplete data input; hence, HGR and compared with MIS. this parameter is incomplete. The data available for Cation/Anion is found for Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data only 1 or 2 years, which is an incomplete data given in HGR and compared with MIS. input; hence, this parameter is incomplete. The SGWB Wells which are mentioned in Table 1 do not specify that they are being monitored for WQ; however, these same wells are found in Table 3. Either Table 1 or Table 3 needs to be Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) rectified.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16.5).

114

2.4.4 Chandurbazar

State Maharashtra District Amravati Block Chandurbazar

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels Information related to Wells and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and/or Water Quality 3 Available Wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 6 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

115

Table (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 9 9 0 7 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Two of the villages which are present in the HGR observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and are not found in MIS, neither under Village Name compared with MIS nor Site Name. These are Karasgaon and Ghat larki. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS The latitude and longitude match perfectly between Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies HGR and MIS; however, there are two wells which observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as are not mentioned in the MIS, and the location of given in HGR, and compared with MIS the same cannot be verified. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and The wells W211920077364201 and compared with MIS W212030077483001 are not found in MIS. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

116

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters All the wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) are found in Table 2. Even the CGWB Wells, the purpose of monitoring of which has not been Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies mentioned in Table 1 are found in Table 2. Hence, observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water it is inferred that these wells are being monitored Level) and Table 2 for WL. There is missing data of Pre & Post monsoon Water Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Level of these well IDs: W211945077435001, Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and W212035077484002 and W212111077340601. compared with MIS. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters There are no SGWB Wells for WQ in Table 1; hence any extra wells falling under SGWB and given under Table 3 have not been considered (Because Table 1 is the superset.) The purpose of Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies monitoring of CGWB Wells has not been observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water mentioned in Table 1, but all of these wells except Quality) and Table 3 2 are mentioned in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC data is available. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation/ Anion data is available. No purpose of monitoring for CGWB wells is given within HGR in Table 1, which is the superset for Table 3; however, CGWB Wells are found in Table 3. SGWB wells, which, according to Table 1 are only being monitored for WL are also found in Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) WQ. Either Table 1 or Table 3 needs correction.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20). 117

2.4.5 Deola

State Maharashtra District Nasik Block Deola

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to levels and water quality Wells used to monitor Groundwater is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and/or Water Quality 3 Available wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at Map showing the 25 in ground water Electrical Conductivity of Water in the Wells is 6 Not Available completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

118

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2)

Number of Wells No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water for Water Level Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 6 4 0 3 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed Two of the villages, Khamkheda and Umrane-1 in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared are not available in the MIS in any form, either with MIS under Village name or GP. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, The latitude and longitude match perfectly and compared with MIS between MIS and HGR Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed Two of the well IDs from HGR cannot be traced in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with into MIS. These are W203130074080001 and MIS W202712074110001. The two extra wells in HGR should be traced Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) and verified.

119

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Table Number of SGWB Wells which are present in 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 2 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed 2 out of the 4 CGWB Wells from Table 1 (for in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Level) and WL) are missing in Table 2. All SGWB wells are Table 2 found. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and compared with The Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level data MIS. matches perfectly between MIS and HGR. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed Only 2 out of 3 wells mentioned for WQ in Table in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and 1 is found in Table 3. There were no SGWB Table 3 Wells for WQ in Table 1 at all. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC data is available for 2 wells Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation / Anion data is available for 2 wells. Only 2 out of 3 wells mentioned in Table 1 under WQ have been found under Table 3, The authenticity of 1 well mentioned for WQ CGWB well in Table 1 should be verified. The Table 3 also seems to be redacted in the PDF Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) version available.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

120

2.4.6 Ghansavangi

State Maharashtra District Jalna Block Ghansavangi

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels Information related to Wells and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 Map showing the Electrical in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the information 6 Available about wells. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

121

Table (0/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (0/2)

Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring NA NA NA NA

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared Table1 is not available in the HGR so the with MIS comparison with the MIS data is not possible. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and Table1 is not available in the HGR so the compared with MIS comparison with the MIS data is not possible. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, Table1 is not available in the HGR so the and compared with MIS comparison with the MIS data is not possible. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with Table1 is not available in the HGR so the MIS comparison with the MIS data is not possible. Table 1 is not available in the hydrogeological report. Hence, the data for any of the parameters i.e., Latitude/Longitude, Well ID, Village name is not present and the comparison with the MIS is Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) impossible.

122

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. NA NA Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Table 1 and Table 3 is not available, and all of the observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water data required for analysis is missing, including Well Quality) and Table 3 ID. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. No EC/TDS information available Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. No Cation/Anion information available. Table 3 is not available in the hydrogeological report. Hence, the data for any of the parameters i.e., Latitude/Longitude, Well ID, Village name is not present and the comparison with the MIS is Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) impossible.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (14).

123

2.4.7 Jalna

State Maharashtra District Jalna Block Jalna

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels Information related to Wells and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 Map showing the Electrical in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the information 6 Available about wells. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

124

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 14 11 0 0 Other Parameters There are two villages in the HGR which do not Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies match with MIS, even when compared with both observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Village Name and Site Name. These are: Jalna and compared with MIS Pokhari Shindhkhed Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitude and longitude of 3 wells in HGR is not given in HGR, and compared with MIS available in MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Well ID of 3 wells is missing in MIS. This is observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and because of three extra wells: W194555076120001, compared with MIS W194955076154001, and W195000075530001. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

125

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. NA NA Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and Table 3 Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Since there are no wells that are mentioned in Table 1 for WQ, the presence of any number of wells in Table 3 for WQ is redundant, because Table 1 is the superset of both, Table 2 and 3. Table 1 must have at least some information about the WQ monitored wells; the wells mentioned in Table 1 are explicitly given only for WL. The SGWB Wells in Table 1 are monitored only for Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) WL, but they are found in Table 3 as well.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

126

2.4.8 Jat

State Maharashtra District Sangli Block Jat

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

127

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2) Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under SGWB No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level for Water Quality CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring 20 9 0 8 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Three of the villages, namely Daphalapur, Borgi and compared with MIS Singanhalli are not found in the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude data matches perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between MIS and HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Three Well IDs that are found in the HGR do not observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and match with MIS. These are W170000075042501, compared with MIS W170800075350001 and W171330075093001. The three extra wells in HGR which are absent in MIS should be correctly identified and their origin Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) mapped.

128

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 3 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Three out of eight villages in Table 1 (for CGWB observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water WQ) are not found in Table 3. These are Quality) and Table 3 Daphlapur, Borgi, and Singanhalli. The wells which match between Table 1 and Table Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given 3 do not specify the EC/TDS for a sufficient in HGR and compared with MIS. number of years. The wells which match between Table 1 and Table Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data 3 do not specify the Anion/Cation for a sufficient given in HGR and compared with MIS. number of years. Table 1 is the superset of the entire report; it has mentioned 8 wells for WQ under CGWB wells. Table 3, however, shows only 5 wells, which gives a discrepancy of 3. Out of the 5 wells, only one well gives the EC/TDS and Anion/Cation data for three years; hence, this parameter is incomplete. Table 1 does not mention any well for WQ in SGWB. But Table 3 has these wells mentioned. So Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) either of the Table can be rectified.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

129

2.4.9 Karjat

State Maharashtra District Ahmednagar Block Karjat

Basic Information (4.5/5)

Serial number Demographic Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Incomplete 4 (Only the Table is present, without any data within it.) 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Ground Water Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells used levels and water quality to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and/or 3 Available Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

130

Tables (4/6)

131

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 4 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water 4 of the CGWB Wells that were present in Table 1 Quality) and Table 3 under WQ are missing from Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The Cation/Anion data is available for only one Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data year between 2015-2019, for only two of the wells given in HGR and compared with MIS. which match between Table 1 (WQ) and Table 3. Table 1 does not mention that the SGWB Wells are also being monitored for WL, but some of these Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) wells have been found in Table 3.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16).

132

2.4.10 Katol

State Maharashtra District Nagpur Block Katol

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels and Information related to water quality Wells used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and/or Water Quality 3 Available wells. Pre-monsoon period Map is available but the village names present in 4 Available the map are not sufficient. Post-monsoon period Map is available but the village names mentioned 5 Available in map are not sufficient. Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 6 degree Celsius) in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

133

Tables (4/6)

134

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies None of the CGWB Wells specify whether they are observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water being monitored for WL or WQ. 7 out of 10 of Quality) and Table 3 these wells, however, are found in Table 3. The EC/TDS data of only 2 wells is given for three Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given years. Although, the minimum requirement is for at in HGR and compared with MIS. least 3 wells data for 3 years. The Cation/ Anion data of only 2 wells is given for three years. Although, the minimum requirement is Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data for at least 3 wells data for 3 years, which is why given in HGR and compared with MIS. this parameter is incomplete. The SGWB wells mentioned in Table 1 do not specify that they are being monitored for WQ. However, some of those wells are found in Table 3. The CGWB wells do not specify the purpose of Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) monitoring at all.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

135

2.4.11 Kavathe Mahankal

State Maharashtra District Sangli Block Kavathe Mahankal

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

136

Table (6/6)

137

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 1 0 Other Parameters Out of the 5 CGWB wells in Table 1 which are Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies monitored for WQ, 1 well is missing from Table 3 observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water with well ID - W170900074582501 (Village Name Quality) and Table 3 - Nimaj). Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC data is available for 3 Years for all the 4 wells. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data Cation/ Anion data is available for 3 Years for all given in HGR and compared with MIS. the 4 wells. The SGWB Wells mentioned in Table 1 do not specify that they are being monitored for WQ as Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) well; but the same wells are mentioned in Table 3.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

138

2.4.12 Khanapur

State Maharashtra District Sangli Block Khanapur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels Information related to Wells and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and/or Water Quality 3 Available wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 6 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

139

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 9 7 0 7 Other Parameters There are 6 villages in the HGR which cannot be Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies traced in the MIS, not even in the GP; namely, observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Palashi, Palashi-1, Khanapur, Vita, Menganwadi, compared with MIS and Ghanwad_Anand. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS The latitude and longitude match perfectly between Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies the MIS and HGR, except for the fact that the observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as location for the two extra wells in the HGR cannot given in HGR, and compared with MIS be found from the MIS. There are four wells which are present in HGR but Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies cannot be found in MIS. These are observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and W171300074490001, W171700074320001, compared with MIS W171900074440001 and W172400074320001. The wells which are found in HGR but are not present in MIS should be traced and their origin Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) should be verified.

140

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the WL wells which are found in Table 1 are Level) and Table 2 present in Table 2. The Water Level data is missing consistently for Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post these five wells: W171300074490001, Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and W171305074490501, W171553074430701, compared with MIS. W171700074320001 and W171900074440001. The wells for which the water level data has not been collected, should be tracked and the data Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) should be collected ideally for each year.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 5 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There are no SGWB Wells in Table 1 for WQ. Out observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water of 7 CGWB Wells in Table 1 which are for WQ, Quality) and Table 3 only 2 are found in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Since most of the Wells under WQ in Table 1 are absent in Table 3, and Table 1 is the superset of the entire report, the authenticity of EC/TDS and Cation/Anion data has not been checked because of this major data deletion. Table 1 does not specify that any SGWB Wells are being monitored for WQ; However, these wells are Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) found in Table 3.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

141

2.4.13 Khatav

State Maharashtra District Satara Block Khatav

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water levels Information related to Wells and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and/or Water Quality 3 Available wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 Map showing the Electrical in ground water Conductivity of Water in the Wells is completely 6 Not Available missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

142

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 17 17 0 17 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There are 10 villages which do not match with any observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and of the names mentioned in the MIS; either under compared with MIS Village Name and Site Name. Site name data is unavailable in the HGR for Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies comparison with the data provided in the MIS. observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, The site names that are present in MIS completely and compared with MIS match with the Village names. The Latitude and Longitude match perfectly when Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies compared to the MIS for the wells which have the observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as required data. For some of the wells the data in MIS given in HGR, and compared with MIS is missing, so the comparison is not possible. The Well IDs mentioned in the HGR match with the data in the MIS completely. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies For 10 of the wells the Well ID data is unavailable observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and in the MIS so the comparison between the two is compared with MIS not possible. The number of wells in HGR is more than those mentioned in the MIS. These extra wells should be Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) verified.

143

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 for WL Level) and Table 2 are present in Table 2. Data mismatch and missing data observed in 12 wells Pre monsoon and Post- monsoon period (for Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post all the years). Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and Water Level Data of some wells not provided in the compared with MIS. MIS for comparison. Data of some wells for the Pre and Post monsoon Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) Water Level missing in the HGR.

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water There are 13 wells which are present in Table 1 for Quality) and Table 3 WQ (CGWB), but are absent in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The SGWB wells in Table 1 are not being monitored for WQ. But the same wells are present Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) in Table 3. This discrepancy needs correction.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16.5).

144

2.4.14 Latur

State Maharashtra District Latur Block Latur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Groundwater is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the 6 Available information about wells. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

145

Tables (6/6)

146

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the wells present in Table 2 match perfectly observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water with the wells in Table 1 (WL). The CGWB wells Level) and Table 2 in Table 1 do not specify if they are being monitored for WL or WQ; all of these wells however, are found in Table 2. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Most of the water level data match between HGR Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and and MIS, but it has been observed that values for compared with MIS. water level data have been rounded off in HGR. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the CGWB wells are found in Table 3. The observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Table 1, however, does not specify that these wells Quality) and Table 3 are being monitored for WL and/or WQ. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given EC data for only 2 wells out of 6 wells is available in HGR and compared with MIS. for 3 years. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data Cation/ Anion data for only 2 wells out of 6 wells given in HGR and compared with MIS. is available for 3 years. The SGWB wells in Table 1 do not specify if they are being monitored for WQ. The same wells are Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) found in Table 3 though.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

147

2.4.15 Madha

State Maharashtra District Solapur Block Madha

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Map showing the location of levels and water quality Wells for Water Level and Water Quality is completely 3 Not Available missing. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the information 6 Available about wells. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

148

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 18 7 0 6 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed Only one village in HGR, Kurdwadi2 does not in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared match with MIS, even when compared with both with MIS village name and site name Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Site name is not available in HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, The Latitude and Longitude of one well is missing and compared with MIS from MIS, hence cannot be compared. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed One well is extra in HGR, which cannot be found in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with anywhere in the MIS. This is MIS W180600075250002. There is one extra well in HGR. It should be Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) identified and the origin should be mapped.

149

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 3 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies 3 wells with Well IDs - W180600075250002, observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water W175715075160201 and W180218075305901 Quality) and Table 3 are missing in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given EC data is not available for any of the wells for 3 in HGR and compared with MIS. years. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data Cation/ Anion data is not for any of the wells for 3 given in HGR and compared with MIS. years. Table 1 does not specify that SGWB wells are being monitored for WQ; these wells. However, Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) they are found in Table 3.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16.5).

150

2.4.16 Malsiras

State Maharashtra District Solapur Block Malshiras

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Map showing the location of levels and water quality Wells for Water Level and Water Quality is completely 3 Not Available missing. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the information 6 Available about wells. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

151

Table (6/6)

152

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells that are found in Table 1 (WL) are Level) and Table 2 found in Table 2. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and The Pre and Post Water Level data matches for all compared with MIS. the wells between HGR and MIS. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 3 0

Other Parameters 3 out of 8 wells mentioned under Table 1 in CGWB Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies WQ are not mentioned under Table 3. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Also, Table 1 shows no wells for SGWB for WQ, Quality) and Table 3 but in Table 3 all these wells are mentioned Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Either Table 1 or Table 3 needs to be rectified for Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) SGWB WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

153

2.4.17 Man

State Maharashtra District Satara Block Man

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

154

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2)

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and There is 1 village which is not mentioned in MIS compared with MIS with village name - Gondavale Bk. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as All the latitudes and longitudes match perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and One of the wells (W174030074360001) is not compared with MIS found in the MIS. There is an extra well in HGR which is not found in MIS. The origin of this well must be checked and Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) verified.

155

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are mentioned in Table 1 (for Level) and Table 2 WL) are found in Table 2. The well W174030074360001 ( village name - Gondavale Bk) has consistently not given any Pre and Post monsoon water level data. The post Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post monsoon water level data of 2019 should be Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and thoroughly checked because there are many compared with MIS. discrepancies in the data between HGR and MIS. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Other Parameters Only one CGWB Well is missing in Table 3 which Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies was present in Table 1 under WQ with well ID - observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water W174030074360001 (village name - Gondavale Quality) and Table 3 Bk). Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Only two wells data given for three years. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Only two wells data given for three years. The SGWB wells mentioned in Table 1 do not specify that they are being monitored for WQ, but these wells are found in Table 3. Either Table 1 or Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) Table 3 needs to be rectified.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

156

2.4.18 Mohol

State Maharashtra District Solapur Block Mohol

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Map showing the location of levels and water quality Wells for Water Level and Water Quality is completely 3 Not Available missing 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the information 6 Available about wells. Map showing Cross – section of subsurface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

157

Tables (6/6)

158

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 3 0 Other Parameters Table 1 shows that no SGWB wells are there for WQ but when Table 3 is viewed it shows the SGWB wells as well. This means that either the Table 1 needs to be rectified or Table 3 requires to Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies be verified. The three CGWB Wells, in observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Begumpur, Kurul, and Vadval are not found in Quality) and Table 3 Table 3, but are mentioned in Table 1. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS.

Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any)

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

159

2.4.19 Morshi

State Maharashtra District Amravati Block Morshi

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Groundwater is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and Water 3 Available Quality wells 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 6 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

160

Table (0/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (0/2) Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring NA NA NA NA Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Table1 is not present in the Hydrogeological compared with MIS Report. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, Table 1 is absent in the Hydrogeological Report. and compared with MIS It is not possible to analyze the HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Table1 is absent in the Hydrogeological Report, given in HGR, and compared with MIS so it is not possible to analyze the data. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and Table1 is absent in the Hydrogeological Report, compared with MIS so the Well ID data is not available. The entire Table1 is missing in the hydrogeological report and so is the required data, which in turn makes the comparison with the MIS Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) data impossible.

161

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (0/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. NA NA Other Parameters Table1 and Table2 both are missing in the Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies hydrogeological report. Hence, the data is observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water considered insufficient for analysis between the Level) and Table 2 two Tables, as Table1 is the superset of Table2

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Table 2 is completely missing in the HGR. Table 2 is missing in the hydrogeological Report, Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) so it is not possible to analyze the data.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. NA NA Other Parameters Table1 is missing and Table3 is present, but the Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies comparison between the Well IDs could not be observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water done, as Table1 is the superset of Table3, which Quality) and Table 3 nullifies the data of Table3, even if it is present. Table1 (Superset) is not available. Hence, the Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given EC/TDS data present in Table 3 becomes in HGR and compared with MIS. completely invalid. Table1 (Superset) is not available. Hence, the Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data Cation/Anion data present in Table3 becomes given in HGR and compared with MIS. completely invalid. Table 3 is available in the hydrogeological report, but Table 1 is absent, which makes the Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) comparison of the two data sets impossible.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (14).

162

2.4.20 Motala

State Maharashtra District Buldhana Block Motala

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not Number available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 6 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

163

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2)

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the villages which are present in HGR match observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and with MIS; either with the Village Name or Site compared with MIS Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude match perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and All the Well IDs mentioned in the HGR are found compared with MIS in the MIS. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

164

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are mentioned in Table 1 Quality) and Table 3 under WQ are found in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The wells which are found in both Table 1 and Table 3 under Water Quality have not given their EC/TDS and Anion/Cation data for sufficient number of years. Only one well which match in both these Tables have given data for at least three years; hence, this parameter is incomplete. Table 1 does not mention any well under WQ for SGWB Wells, but a few of these wells (like the one in village Urha) are found in Table 3. This Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) error needs rectification.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

165

2.4.21 Narkhed

State Maharashtra District Nagpur Block Narkhed

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks Location map of the Block/Taluk The map is present, but not 1 Available readable 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and Water 3 Available Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the information 6 Available about wells. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

166

Tables (6/6)

167

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters The Wells under SGWB under WL in Table 1 Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies match perfectly with Table 2. However, the observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water information of WL/WQ has not been given for Level) and Table 2 CGWB wells, which makes comparison difficult. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post There are two wells for which the data is either Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and missing or there is a mismatch: compared with MIS. W212107078274401 and W212807078264501. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters There are no SGWB Wells for WQ according to Table 1. But these same wells have been mentioned in Table 3 for SGWB WQ wells. Table 1 also does not specify WL/WQ for CGWB Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Wells. Hence, the comparison is extremely observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water difficult. There are 11 CGWB wells in Table 1 Quality) and Table 3 and only 5 wells are monitored for WQ. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC data is available. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation /Anion data is available. There is no reliable way to understand if a well Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) under CGWB is being monitored for WL or WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

168

2.4.22 Nilanga

State Maharashtra District Latur Block Nilanga

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks Location map of the Block/Taluk The map is present, but not 1 Available readable 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Groundwater is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and 3 Available Water Quality wells 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

169

Tables (4/6)

170

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells present in Table 1(for WL) match Level) and Table 2 perfectly with Table 2. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post It has been observed that many values have been Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and rounded off in HGR when comparing to MIS compared with MIS. which is why the data does not match. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water There are 13 extra wells in Table 3 of HGR which Quality) and Table 3 are not present in Table 1. Data for EC/TDS is not available for a minimum Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given of 3 years for any of the wells in Table3, which is in HGR and compared with MIS. the required criteria. Data for Cation/Anion is not available for a Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data minimum of 3 years for any of the wells in given in HGR and compared with MIS. Table3, which is the required criteria. None of the wells have WQ data for more than 2 years which does not match the qualifying criteria, hence the authenticity of the data has not been checked. Also, no SGWB wells were present in Table 1 for WQ but 17 SGWB wells with no Well ID/Latitude and longitude are present in Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) Table 3 whose source needs to be checked.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16.5).

171

2.4.23 Osmanabad

State Maharashtra District Osmanabad Block Osmanabad

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Groundwater is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and Water 3 Available Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the information 6 Available about wells. Map showing Cross – section of subsurface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

172

Tables (6/6)

173

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies One of the wells with Well ID- observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water W181930075575001, is present in Table 2 but not Level) and Table 2 found in Table 1. Pre and Post Monsoon Water level values for 2015 Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post to 2019 are matching in MIS and HGR. One well Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and (W180556075581501) has not given any data compared with MIS. consistently. One Well ID available in Table 2 of HGR is not matching with any of the Well ID available in HGR Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) Table 1.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

174

2.4.24 Pandharpur

State Maharashtra District Solapur Block Pandharpur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Map showing the location of levels and water quality Wells for Water Level and Water Quality is completely 3 Not Available missing. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the information 6 Available about wells Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

175

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under SGWB No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Level for Water Quality for Water Quality Level Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring 14 8 0 8 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies One of the village names in the HGR, "Chale" is not observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, found in the MIS, even when compared with the Site and compared with MIS Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, The latitude and longitude of the wells match between as given in HGR, and compared with MIS the HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Well ID W173900075250001 is not found in MIS.

Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

176

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Level) and Table 2 Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and The Pre and Post Water Level data matches between compared with MIS. HGR and MIS.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 1 0 Other Parameters Only one well (Chale) mentioned in Table 1 under Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies CGWB WQ is not mentioned in Table 3. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for For SGWB no well is mentioned for WQ in Table 1, Water Quality) and Table 3 but those wells are mentioned in Table 3 Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Either Table 1 or Table 3 has to be rectified for the Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) SGWB WQ wells

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

177

2.4.25 Parola

State Maharashtra District Jalgaon Block Parola

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9 /9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available 3 Locations of wells for monitoring water levels and water quality Information related to Wells used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Available Level and/or Water Quality wells 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available 6 Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 in ground water Available 7 Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

178

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under SGWB No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Level for Water Quality for Water Quality Level Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring 16 4 0 5 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, There is one village in HGR, "Sadavan Bk." which is not and compared with MIS found in MIS, either under Village Name or Site Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, All latitude and longitude match perfectly between HGR as given in HGR, and compared with MIS and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and All wells match perfectly between HGR and MIS except compared with MIS 1 CGWB well W205110075060001. There is one extra well in Table 1 which is not present in Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) MIS.

179

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Out of 5 CGWB wells which are mentioned in Table 1 observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for (without WL vs WQ demarcation) 4 wells are found in Water Level) and Table 2 Table 2.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Water level data of some wells is missing in both MIS Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and HGR. The well W205445075023401 has not given and compared with MIS. any data for the year 2017. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Out of 5 CGWB wells which are mentioned in Table 1 (without WL vs WQ demarcation) all 5 wells are found Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies in Table 2. Only 1 well with village Name Sadavan Bk. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for which is given in Table 3, doesn’t consist of data for Water Quality) and Table 3 even 1 year. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC data given for 3 years in 2 wells. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation/ Anion data is given for 3 years in 2 wells. WQ data for well ID - W205110075060001 is not present in both HGR and MIS. Also, only 1 year WQ data is available for wells with well ID - W205130075013001 and W205622075034001. There are no SGWB Wells under Table 1 which are being monitored for WQ. However, Table 3 mentions these exact wells; hence, these wells should be verified properly because Table 1 is the superset for Table 2 and Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) 3.

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

180

2.4.26 Partur

State Maharashtra District Jalna Block Partur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9 /9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available 3 Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used to water levels and water quality monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Available Level and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available 6 Map showing distribution of EC(µ Map showing the Electrical S/ cm at 25 in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not Available show the information about wells. 7 Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

181

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water SGWB for Water Quality for Water Quality Level Monitoring Level Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring 8 4 0 3 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, All the village names match in HGR and MIS; when and compared with MIS compared with both, Village Name and Site Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The latitudes and longitudes for a few wells is wrong observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, in the HGR itself which makes the first parameter as given in HGR, and compared with MIS impossible to compare and analyze. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS All the Well IDs match between HGR and MIS. The latitude and longitude data should be correct in the HGR. The exact location of the wells is a very Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) important parameter.

182

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters All the SGWB wells which are found in Table 1 (WL) are found in Table 2. The CGWB Wells in Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Table 1 do not specify if they are being monitored observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water for WL or WQ. However, all these wells are found Level) and Table 2 in Table 2.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and compared with MIS.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The CGWB wells mentioned in Table 1 do not observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water specify if they are being monitored for WL or WQ. Quality) and Table 3 3 out of 4 of these wells are found in Table 3. The EC data is not sufficient in Table 3. only one Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given well which matches between Table 1 and Table 3 in HGR and compared with MIS. has given the data for at least three years The Anion/Cation data is not sufficient in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data only one well which matches between Table 1 and given in HGR and compared with MIS. Table 3 has given the data for at least three years. The SGWB Wells mentioned in Table 1 do not specify that they are being monitored for WQ. Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) However, these same wells are found in Table 3.

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

183

2.4.27 Purandhar

State Maharashtra District Pune Block Purandhar

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (6 /9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks Location map of the 1 Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the The Hydrogeological Map is completely 2 Block / taluk Not Available missing. Locations of wells for monitoring water levels and 3 water quality Available 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of Map showing the Electrical Conductivity EC(µ S/ cm at 25 in ground of Water in the Wells is completely 6 water Not Available missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer 7 groups (Optional) Not Available

184

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water for Water Quality Level Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 14 8 0 8 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, All the villages are mentioned in MIS; either under and compared with MIS Village Name nor Site Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, The latitude and longitude data matches perfectly as given in HGR, and compared with MIS between the HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and All the well IDs which are mentioned in HGR match compared with MIS with those in MIS. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

185

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are present in Table 1 for WL Level) and Table 2 are found in Table 2.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and The Data of Well ID- W182450074010001 is compared with MIS. consistently missing in HGR after 2015.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are mentioned under Table 1 Quality) and Table 3 for WQ are found in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The SGWB Wells mentioned in Table 1 do not specify that they are being monitored for WQ. The well in Walhe (an SGWB well), however, is Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) found in Table 3.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (17).

186

2.4.28 Rahata

State Maharashtra District Ahmednagar Block Rahata

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5 /9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the 2 Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used to water levels and water quality monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of Map showing the Electrical Conductivity EC(µ S/ cm at 25 in ground water of Water in the Wells is completely 6 Not Available missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer 7 groups (Optional) Not Available

187

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water SGWB for Water for Water Quality Monitoring Level Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 8 5 0 4 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Four of the villages: Rajuri_Pz, Loni-Pravara observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, Nagar, Babhuleshwar and Rahata NEW are not and compared with MIS found in the MIS either under Village Name or GP. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitudes match perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between MIS and HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS All the well IDs match between HGR and MIS.

Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

188

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for All the wells present in Table 1 for WL are found in Water Level) and Table 2 Table 2 for both CGWB and SGWB.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post There are constant data mismatches for these four Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and wells: W194300074290001, W193630074324501, compared with MIS. W193531074285501 and W194300074290001.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

189

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 2 0 Other Parameters There are no SGWB Wells in Table 1 for WQ, but the same wells have been mentioned in Table 3. Hence, the wells in Table 3 for WQ monitoring Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies have not been considered. 2 wells, out of 4, which observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for are found in Table 1 under CGWB WQ are found in Water Quality) and Table 3 Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The Cation/Anion data for the wells which match Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data between Table 1 (WQ) and Table 3 is present for given in HGR and compared with MIS. only one well in the HGR. The wells which are mentioned under CGWB Table 1 for WQ should be correctly mapped in Table 3 as well. The SGWB wells in Table 1 should also mention that they are being monitored for WQ Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) because they are found in Table 3.

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

190

2.4.29 Raver

State Maharashtra District Jalgaon Block Raver

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps ( 9/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks Location map of the 1 Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the 2 Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for Information related to Wells used to monitoring water levels and monitor Groundwater is present; however, water quality it does not specify Water Level and/or 3 Available Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 in ground 6 water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer 7 groups (Optional) Not Available

191

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water SGWB for Water for Water Quality Monitoring Level Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 10 5 0 5 Other Parameters All the villages match between HGR and MIS, when compared with both, the Village Name and Site Name. Only two villages, namely, Khiroda - 1 and Abhora Bk for CGWB wells origin needs to be Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies found as these two villages are not available in observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, either of the Table 2 and 3 of HGR and also MIS and compared with MIS sheet. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS There is latitude and longitude mismatch for 1 well of Abore kh., Data of two wells of villages- Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Khiroda -1 and Abhora Bk is not available in HGR observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as and MIS, hence, origin needs to be found for these given in HGR, and compared with MIS two wells. Well IDs match perfectly when compared to the Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies MIS, except for two wells with Well ID- observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and W211250075530003, W211850076004001 as the compared with MIS data is completely missing in the MIS. Some discrepancies observed in the Village Names and Well IDs of the same as the data was not provided in the MIS. Hence, the basis of the two wells is not justified. Table 1 also does not give the purpose of Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) monitoring for CGWB Wells.

192

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Pre monsoon and Post monsoon data is missing in Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and some wells for some of the mentioned years in MIS compared with MIS. and as well as HGR. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Only one well with a well ID - Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies W211450076020401 and its village name - Raver1 observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for has data for 3 years. All other wells provide data Water Quality) and Table 3 only for 1 - 2 years. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data The EC/ TDS data is not available in the HGR for given in HGR and compared with MIS. all the wells. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data The Cation/Anion data is not available in the HGR given in HGR and compared with MIS. for all the wells.. In Table3 the Water Quality data is mentioned for CGWB as well as SGWB wells. But, according to Table1 the SGWB wells are only monitored for Water Level. The data is not available for two wells of Villages- Khiroda -1 and Abhora Bk. No data is available for any of the mentioned CGWB wells in the Water Quality MIS, hence, the comparison is not possible. Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any)

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

193

2.4.30 Sangamner

State Maharashtra District Ahmednagar Block Sangamner

Basic Information (4.5/5)

Serial Demographic number Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Incomplete (Only the Table is present, without any 4 data within it.) 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Ground Water Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Un Number available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Groundwater is present; however, it does not specify Water Level and Water 3 Available Quality wells 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Not Conductivity of Water in the 6 Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups Not 7 (Optional) Available

194

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water SGWB for Water for Water Quality Monitoring Level Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 26 10 0 6 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the village names match with the data present in observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, the MIS, either with the Village Name or Site and compared with MIS Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude data matches between given in HGR, and compared with MIS MIS and HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and The well IDs match perfectly between the MIS and compared with MIS HGR. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

195

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which were found in Table 1 under Level) and Table 2 WL have been found in Table 2.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and All the Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level data compared with MIS. match between HGR and MIS.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 1 0 Other Parameters All, but one of the wells (mapped through village name) that are present in Table 1 (for WQ) are Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies found in Table 3. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water The missing CGWB well that is present in Table 1 Quality) and Table 3 but absent in Table 3 is in the village Sangamner. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any)

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

196

2.4.31 Sinnar

State Maharashtra District Nashik Block Sinnar

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks Location map of the 1 Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the 2 Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for Information related to Wells used to monitoring water levels and monitor Groundwater is present; however, water quality it does not specify Water Level and/or 3 Available Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 in ground Map showing the Electrical Conductivity of 6 water Not Available Water in the Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised 7 aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

197

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under SGWB No. of wells under SGWB for Water CGWB for Water for Water Quality CGWB for Water Quality Level Monitoring Level Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring 18 9 0 9 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, All the village names in HGR match with the Site and compared with MIS Names given in MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, The latitude and longitude matches perfectly between as given in HGR, and compared with MIS MIS and HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS All the Well IDs match between MIS and HGR. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

198

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for All the wells which are mentioned under WL in Table Water Level) and Table 2 1 are found in Table 2.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR The 2016 and 2017 Water Level data has been rounded and compared with MIS. off in HGR.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for All the wells which were found in Table 1 under Water Quality) and Table 3 CGWB WQ are present in Table 3. The data for EC/TDS is only available for 3 years Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data for two wells, although the requirement is for 3 given in HGR and compared with MIS. years data of at least 4 wells. The data for Cation/Anion is only available for 3 Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data years for two wells, although the requirement is for given in HGR and compared with MIS. 3 years data of at least 4 wells. Not all the wells which are found in Table 3 are present in Table 1 for WQ. The origin of these wells should be traced. The SGWB wells in Table 1 do not specify that they are being monitored for WQ; however, these Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) wells are found in Table 3.

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16.5).

199

2.4.32 Tasgaon

State Maharashtra District Sangli Block Tasgaon

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps Score (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Map showing the location of levels and water quality Wells for Water Level and Water Quality is completely 3 Available missing. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 6 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

200

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under SGWB No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Level for Water Quality for Water Quality Level Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring 3 2 0 2 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, All the village names match with the data given in and compared with MIS MIS; either with the Village Name or Site Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, All the latitudes and longitudes match perfectly as given in HGR, and compared with MIS between HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and All the Well IDs which were found in HGR are found compared with MIS in MIS. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

201

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the wells which are found in Table 1 for WL Level) and Table 2 are present in Table 2.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and The Pre and Post Monsoon water level data is compared with MIS. missing for the well W171142074402401.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

202

2.4.33 Umarga

State Maharashtra District Osmanabad Block Umarga

Basic Information (4.5/5)

Serial Demographics number Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Incomplete (Only Table is present, without any 4 data within it.) 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Ground Water Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps ( 7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Map showing the location of levels and water quality Wells for Water Level and Water Quality is completely 3 Not Available missing. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the information 6 Available about wells. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

203

Tables ( 4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 )

Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under SGWB No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water for Water Quality for Water Quality Level Monitoring Level Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring 15 4 0 4

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in Village Name for 4 CGWB wells are not available in HGR, and compared with MIS MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared Latitude Longitude Values for all the wells are matching with MIS both in HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, Well ID of all the wells available in MIS and HGR are and compared with MIS matching. Village Name of 4 CGWB wells are not available in MIS. Site Name for all the wells are not available in HGR. Table 1 does not give the purpose of monitoring of Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) CGWB wells.

204

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Well ID for all the wells available in Table 1 and Table Water Level) and Table 2 3 of HGR are matching.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR Pre and Post Data points for all the wells are available in and compared with MIS. HGR and MIS. Data points are matching. Well ID available in Table 1 and Table 2 of HGR are matching for all the wells. Data points for pre and post Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) monsoon are matching for all the wells.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Quality) and Table 3 Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Data for EC is not available in Table 3 of HGR. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Incomplete data given. Table 1 in HGR shows no well for SGWB in Water Quality but in Table 3 of HGR, there is one well available which belongs to SGWB. This means either Table 1 requires rectification or Table 3 needs Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) verification

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16).

205

2.4.34 Wai

State Maharashtra District Satara Block Wai

Basic Information (5/5)

Serial Demographics number Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete 4 Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Complete 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Ground Water Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm Map showing the Electrical at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

206

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 )

Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water SGWB for Water for Water Quality Level Monitoring Level Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 8 3 0 3

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, Two of the villages "Songirwadi" and "Udtara" are not and compared with MIS found in MIS; neither in Village Name or Site Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, The latitude and longitude match perfectly between as given in HGR, and compared with MIS HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and The Well ID W175100073570001 is absent from the compared with MIS MIS but is present in HGR. There is one extra well in the HGR which is absent Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) from the MIS. It's origin should be verified.

207

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Level) and Table 2

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Most of the pre-post WL data is matching between Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR HGR and MIS. The Well W175100073570001 has and compared with MIS. consistently not given any Water Level data.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 1 0 Other Parameters Table 1 for SGWB WQ shows 0 wells, but 6 wells of Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies this subset are mentioned inTable 3. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for For CGWB WQ wells, 1 well which is mentioned in Water Quality) and Table 3 Table 1 is missing in Table 3, Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC data is available for 1 well only. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation/Anion data is available for 1 well. Table 1 or Table 3 for SGWB WQ wells need to be Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) rectified

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

208

2.4.35 Warud

State Maharashtra District Amravati Block Warud

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Groundwater is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 6 25 in ground water Available Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

209

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water for Water Quality Level Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 19 11 0 9 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, There are 10 village names in the HGR which do and compared with MIS not match with the MIS Village name or the GP. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude match perfectly between given in HGR, and compared with MIS HGR and MIS. Four of the wells mentioned in the HGR cannot be Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies found in the MIS. These are: W212720078082001, observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and W212730078103001, W212730078103002 and compared with MIS W212950078142001. The origin of the extra wells in the HGR which are Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) missing from MIS must be traced.

210

The CGWB Wells mentioned under Table 1 do not specify whether they are being monitored for WL or WQ. In the case of the SGWB Wells, for five well IDs in Table 1, the site name did not match with the same well ID in Table 2. These Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies are: W213040078233501, W212700078211001, observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water W213230078230501, Level) and Table 2 W212320078192501,W213450078245001 Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The purpose of monitoring of CGWB wells should be correctly given in Table 1, so that Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) authentic verification of Table 2 can be done.

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies According to Table 1, the SGWB wells are being observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water monitored only for WQ. However, these wells are Quality) and Table 3 present in Table 3 as well. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given Not enough wells specify the data for EC/TDS in HGR and compared with MIS. across the years. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data Not all the wells have given the Anion/Cation given in HGR and compared with MIS. data for at least three years. Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) Either Table 1 or Table 3 should be corrected.

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (20).

211

2.4.36 Yawal

State Maharashtra District Jalgaon Block Yawal

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9/9)

212

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water for Water Quality Level Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 7 7 0 7 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the Villages that are present in the HGR are observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, found in MIS either under Village Name or Site and compared with MIS Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, All latitude and longitude match perfectly between as given in HGR, and compared with MIS HGR and MIS except for 2 wells . Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the wells match perfectly between HGR and MIS observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and except W211000075512201 and compared with MIS W211008075375201. Data for 2 CGWB wells is not available in MIS; also in Table 1, it has not been mentioned which CGWB Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) well is being monitored for WL and WQ.

213

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters 2 CGWB wells W211000075512201 and W211008075375201 are present in Table 1 of HGR but are absent from Table 2. Since the purpose of Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies monitoring of CGWB Wells has not been given, it is observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for not possible to determine if these wells are actually Water Level) and Table 2 supposed to be missing from Table 2 or not. The pre and post monsoon water level data is missing Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post in both MIS and HGR in some places. The well Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and W211000075512201 has not given any data for compared with MIS. multiple years consistently. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies 2 CGWB wells W211000075512201 and observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for W211008075375201 are present in Table 1 but are Water Quality) and Table 3 missing from both Table 2 and Table 3. Data for EC/TDS is available for only 2 years for most of the wells which does not match the Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data qualifying parameter; hence, the authenticity of the given in HGR and compared with MIS. data has not been checked Data for cation and anion is available for only 2 years for most of the wells which does not match the Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion qualifying parameter; hence, the authenticity of the data given in HGR and compared with MIS. data has not been checked Water Quality data is available for only 2 years for most of the wells which do not match the qualifying parmeter; hence, the authenticity of the data has not been checked. The SGWB Wells do not mention that they are being monitored for WQ but these wells are Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) found in Table 3 as well.

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18). 214

2.4.37 Indapur

State Maharashtra District Pune Block Indapur

Basic Information (5/5)

Serial Demographics number Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Complete (Only Net Irrigated Area is present; information regarding Gross Irrigated Area and methods of Irrigation is 4 absent.) 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Ground Water Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (6 /9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk The Hydrogeological Map is 2 Not Available completely missing. Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Ground Water is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm Map showing the Electrical at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

215

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water for Water Quality Level Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 20 2 0 2 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the village names match perfectly in the HGR observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, with the data provided in MIS, either with the Village and compared with MIS Name or Site Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, All Latitude and longitude match perfectly between as given in HGR, and compared with MIS HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS All Well IDs in HGR match perfectly with MIS. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

216

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for All the wells mentioned in Table 1 under WL are Water Level) and Table 2 found in Table 2.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post There are several data points missing in the HGR for Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and some of the wells. No well, however, is consistently compared with MIS. reflecting any data deletion or absence.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters There are 0 SGWB and 2 CGWB wells mentioned in Table 1 for WQ but in Table 3 data for 18 SGWB Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies sites have been mentioned for 288 wells for Water observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Quality assessment. The source and authenticity of Water Quality) and Table 3 these wells/water sources needs to be checked. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Only 1 year's data has been disclosed for the well W180500074550001 and 2 year's data has been disclosed for the well W181600074460001 in both Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) MIS and HGR.

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (15). 217

2.4.38 Renapur

State Maharashtra District Latur Block Renapur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (9 /9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to monitor Groundwater is present; however, it does not specify Water Level 3 Available and/or Water Quality wells. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity is present, but does not show the information 6 Available about wells. Map showing Cross – section of subsurface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

218

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water for Water Quality Level Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 11 3 0 3 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All the village names that are present in HGR match observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, with the data in MIS, either with the village name or and compared with MIS site name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, The latitude and longitude data matches perfectly as given in HGR, and compared with MIS between HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and Well ID for all the wells are matching in MIS and compared with MIS HGR. Table 1 does not give the purpose of monitoring of Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) CGWB wells.

219

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for All the wells which are present in Table 1 for WL are Water Level) and Table 2 found in Table 2.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR The Pre and Post Monsoon Water level data matches and compared with MIS. between HGR and MIS.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0 /2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters All the wells which are present in Table 1 for CGWB Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies WQ are found in Table 3. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for For SGWB in Table 1, no wells are mentioned for Water Quality) and Table 3 WQ, but in Table 3 those wells are mentioned Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data EC values for all of the mentioned wells are not given in HGR and compared with MIS. available for 3 years in Table 3. Cation/Anion values for all of the mentioned wells are Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion not available for 3 years in Table 3, which is the data given in HGR and compared with MIS. parameter of completion for this Table. Either Table 1 or Table 3 needs to be rectified for WQ Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) SGWB.

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18).

220

2.5 Uttar Pradesh

Basic S.no State Block Information Maps Tables Total Score Status Uttar 1 Pradesh Sarila 5 7.5 4 16.5 Incomplete Uttar 2 Pradesh Muskara 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete Uttar 3 Pradesh Pilana 5 6 6 17 Incomplete Uttar 4 Pradesh Panwari 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete Uttar 5 Pradesh Manikpur 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete Uttar 6 Pradesh Mau 5 6 6 17 Incomplete Uttar 7 Pradesh Talbehat 5 7.5 4 16.5 Incomplete Uttar 8 Pradesh Mahuva 5 6 6 17 Incomplete Uttar 9 Pradesh Sumerpur 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete Uttar 10 Pradesh Kandhala 5 7.5 4 16.5 Incomplete Uttar 11 Pradesh Kabrai 5 6 4 15 Incomplete Uttar 12 Pradesh Charkhari 5 4.5 6 15.5 Incomplete Uttar 13 Pradesh Baghpat 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete Uttar 14 Pradesh Budhana 5 3 4 12 Incomplete Uttar 15 Pradesh Jaitpur 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete Uttar 16 Pradesh Rajpura 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete Uttar 17 Pradesh Tindwari 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete Uttar Mauranip 18 Pradesh ur 5 7.5 4 16.5 Incomplete Uttar Ramnaga 19 Pradesh r 5 7.5 4 16.5 Incomplete Uttar Kharkhod 20 Pradesh a 5 4.5 6 15.5 Incomplete Uttar 21 Pradesh Jaspura 5 6 6 17 Incomplete Uttar 22 Pradesh Maudaha 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete 23 Uttar Karvi 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete

221

Pradesh Uttar 24 Pradesh Babina 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete Uttar 25 Pradesh Badokhar 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete Uttar 26 Pradesh Naraini 5 7.5 6 18.5 Incomplete

2.5.1 Babina

State Uttar Pradesh District Jhansi Block Babina

Basic Information (5/5)

222

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/ Not number Demographics Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and 3 Available Water quality measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 degrees Celsius) in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface 7 regionalised aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

223

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2)

Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 9 3 0 1 Other Parameters One of the CGWB wells being monitored for WQ, which is located in Jhansi 1 according to the HGR is not found in the MIS under either Village Name Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies or Site Name. observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and This particular well should be identified and the compared with MIS correction should be made in either HGR or MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The Latitude and Longitude for most of the wells given in HGR, and compared with MIS match between HGR and MIS. Well IDs 400116, JHN07, JHN13, JHN14 are not found in the MIS. One of the CGWB well being monitored for WQ does not provide a well ID in Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies the HGR. observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and There is one extra well in the MIS which is not compared with MIS found in the HGR.

Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

224

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters The CGWB wells have given different Well IDs in Table 1 and Table 2; hence, the comparison between Tables 1 and 2 has been done on the basis of Village Name. One CGWB well mentioned in Table 2 but not in Table 1. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies One SGWB well in the village Khailar is observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water mentioned in Table 1 with Well ID 400116 and in Level) and Table 2 Table 2 with the Well ID 400115. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and No Water Level data for SGWB and CGWB wells compared with MIS. is available for the year 2019 in HGR. Data points require to be rechecked for these 5 wells - 400101, 400102, 400103, 400121 and Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) 400122.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters HGR Table 1 has just 1 well for WQ (village Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies name - Babina) and the Eell ID for the same is not observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water provided in HGR. Table 3 of HGR mentions 15 Quality) and Table 3 other wells. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC/ TDS data for year 2019 is not provided. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation/Anion data for year 2019 is not provided MIS WQ data sheet does not provide a well ID, Village name and site name of the singular well which matches between Table 1 (WQ) and Table Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) 3, which makes comparison difficult.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

225

2.5.2 Barokhar Khurd

State Uttar Pradesh District Banda Block Badokhar Khurd

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk 2 Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and 3 Available Water quality measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 degree Celsius) in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

226

Table (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude data matches perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between MIS and HGR. Three of the wells in HGR do not have any Well ID data, which makes comparison with MIS difficult. There are five well IDs which are present in MIS but absent from HGR. These are Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies W252545080230001, W252630080090601, observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and W252900080191501, W253050080211501 and compared with MIS W253230080253001. The mismatches between HGR and MIS should be verified correctly. The wells should be given Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) IDs to make analysis of their data easier.

227

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Well IDs for CGWB wells not matching in Table 1 and Table 2. Hence,the comparison has been Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies done on the basis of village name. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water 3 CGWB wells mentioned in Table 2 are not Level) and Table 2 mentioned in Table 1. There are major mismatches in the HGR and MIS data. The Water Level data needs a thorough Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post check. The data has either been rounded off, or Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and this is a data entry error, which needs to be compared with MIS. checked. The data mismatch in case of Water Level data Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) should be verified.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There is only one well for Water Quality in Table observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water 1, and the authenticity of data for only that well Quality) and Table 3 has been checked. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. There are 9 wells in Table 3 in total; out of which one is the well which matches with the Table 1 that is mentioned under WQ. Out of the other 8 wells, another well is also found in Table 1, but it is mentioned only under WL. The remaining 7 wells, on the other hand, are not Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) mentioned in Table 1 at all, even under WL.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5). 228

2.5.3 Baghpat

State Uttar Pradesh District Baghpat Block Baghpat

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells water levels and water quality used to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and 3 Available Water quality measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 degree Celsius) in ground Map showing the Electrical water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

229

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 )

Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under CGWB SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 10 0 0 1

Other Parameters Village name data is not available in MIS for Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies comparison. Therefore, the data has been verified observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and between the Village Name of HGR and Site Name compared with MIS of MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, All the site names under MIS match with the and compared with MIS village names of HGR except “Baghpat”

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Latitude and Longitude from MIS and HGR match observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as perfectly, except for Baghpat as no MIS lat/long given in HGR, and compared with MIS data available for comparison. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Well ID is not available for 1 well in both HGR and observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and MIS, otherwise there is a perfect match for all the compared with MIS other Wells IDs. Minor discrepancies observed while comparing Village names as they were given under Site name in MIS. No Village name, site name, Well ID and Lat/long data available in MIS for 1 well (Baghpat). Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) The origin of this well should be verified.

230

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 1 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The CGWB wells have different Well IDs in Table observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water 1 and Table 2. One of the SGWB Wells which is Level) and Table 2 present for WL in Table 1 is not found in Table 2. No data available for 1 well (110114) for any of the years in HGR, but is present in MIS. This discrepancy should be verified and the reason for absence of data must be checked. No data is available for 2019 Pre and Post monsoon in both HGR and MIS for all of the mentioned Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post wells. The wells were clearly not monitored for this Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and particular year. compared with MIS. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

231

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 NA Other Parameters Well ID is not available In both Table1 and Table3 for the well that is being monitored for Water Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Quality; hence it is very difficult to check for the observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water authenticity of the data given. The comparison has Quality) and Table 3 been done on the basis of Village Names. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. No discrepancies found in EC data in the HGR. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data No discrepancies found in Cation/Anion data in the given in HGR and compared with MIS. HGR. No data available in MIS for the well that is being monitored for Water Quality, so comparison is not possible. Also, there are 16 more wells that are present in Table3 but not mentioned in Table1. There is no way to understand the origin of these wells, since Table 1 is the superset of the entire HGR. Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any)

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

232

2.5.4 Budhana

State Uttar Pradesh District Muzaffarnagar Block Budhana

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (3/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Map related to the location of levels and water quality wells to monitor Water level and Water quality is same as Map 1 (Location Map of the 3 Not Available Block/Taluk) Pre-monsoon period The pre monsoon map is same as Map 1 (Location Map of the 4 Not Available Block/Taluk) Post-monsoon period The post monsoon map is same as Map 1((Location Map 5 Not Available of the Block/Taluk) Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at 25 in ground water Map showing the Electrical Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

233

Tables (4/6)

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, The latitude and longitude data matches and compared with MIS perfectly. There is one well for which we do not have any Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed ID in HGR and MIS, hence, the origin of this in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with well cannot be determined. It is located in the MIS village Budhana. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

234

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (0/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Level) and Table 2 No discrepancies found Pre and Post Water Level data for the year 2019 is not given in HGR Most of the mentioned data points are not matching and also it is visible that data points are missing in HGR. The data has either been rounded off or there is a Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post data entry error. Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and For the Well ID - 580202, data is given for the year compared with MIS. 2015 - 2017 in MIS, but is missing in the HGR. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water The well which is being monitored for WQ in both Quality) and Table 3 Table 1 and 3 has not given any Well ID. Data for year 2019 is not provided for this Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given particular well with village name - Budhana in in HGR and compared with MIS. HGR. Cation/Anion Values are available in Table 3 of HGR. Data for year 2019 is not provided for this particular well with village name - Budhana in Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data HGR. given in HGR and compared with MIS. Well ID, Village Name and Site name are not provided for this particular block of Budhana in Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) MIS which makes the data difficult to compare.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (12).

235

2.5.5 Charkhari

State Uttar Pradesh District Mahoba Block Charkhari

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (4.5/9)

Serial Available/Not number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Map showing the Location of levels and water quality Wells for monitoring Water Level and Water Quality is 3 Not Available completely missing. Pre-monsoon period 4 Available Post-monsoon period The post monsoon map is same as Map 4 (Map showing distribution of Water level in 5 Not Available pre monsoon period) Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

236

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2 )

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and The Village Name is not present in MIS; hence compared with MIS the comparison is done with the Site name. The Site Name is not available in HGR, hence the comparison has been done between "Village Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Name" in HGR and "GP" in MIS. All the names observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, match, except Kulpahar New and Kulpahar 2 and compared with MIS which are only mentioned in HGR. Latitude and longitude match perfectly for 10 Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies wells, but latitude and longitude for 5 wells is observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as missing in the MIS. These are Tikhari, two in given in HGR, and compared with MIS Charkhari, Kulpahar New and Kulpahar 2. Well ID for 5 wells is not available in the MIS, hence comparison for these wells is not possible. Also, 510404 Well ID has been mentioned twice Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies in the HGR. observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and The Well W252400079450001 is present in MIS compared with MIS but is missing from HGR. The origin of the extra wells which were found in HGR but were missing from MIS should be Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) mapped and verified.

237

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 2 0 Other Parameters 2 CGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 are absent in Table 2. Well ID for 1 CGWB well is Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies not matching hence the comparison was made on observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water basis of village name. All the SGWB Wells are Level) and Table 2 matching in Table 1 (For WL) and Table 2. No data is available for the year 2019 in both MIS and HGR. Moreover, when the comparison was Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post made for the existing data of wells, it was Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and observed that the values given in the MIS were compared with MIS. rounded off. All the Water Level data should be verified Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) correctly between MIS and HGR.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There is only one well for WQ in Table 1, hence observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water the authenticity of the data has been checked for Quality) and Table 3 only that well. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Well ID has not been given for the well in both HGR and MIS. The data has been analysed on Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) matching the Village Name.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (15.5).

238

2.5.6 Jaitpur

State Uttar Pradesh District Mahoba Block Jaitpur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and 3 Available Water quality measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 degree Celsius) in ground water Map showing the Electrical Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

239

Tables (6/6)

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitude and longitude are matching in HGR and given in HGR, and compared with MIS MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and There are 4 Well IDs in HGR which are not compared with MIS consistent with MIS. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

240

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post The pre and post Water Level data is not found in Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and HGR for some of the wells, the reason for the compared with MIS. same should be mentioned. Pre and Post Water Level Data of 2019 is not given in HGR and the data of the wells of CGWB Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) is matching.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0

Other Parameters There is only one village name Jaitpur which is given in Table-1 for water quality and it matches Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies with the Table-3. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water MIS WQ datasheet does not provide well ID of Quality) and Table 3 the same village. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. There are extra wells in Table 3 which were not Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) given in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

241

2.5.7 Jaspura

State Uttar Pradesh District Banda Block Jaspura

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (6/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and 3 Available Water quality measurement. Pre-monsoon period 4 Available Post-monsoon period The post monsoon map is same as Map 4 (Map showing distribution of Water level in 5 Not Available pre monsoon period) Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 degree Celsius) in ground water Map showing the Electrical Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

242

Tables (6/6)

Other Parameters The Village Names in HGR have been compared with the Site Names in MIS; and only one village "Jaspura" is not found in the MIS which is CGWB WQ well. The MIS WQ data sheet does not provide any Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies information of village name or site name to observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compare this particular well. Hence, its compared with MIS comparison is difficult with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Latitude and Longitude matches perfectly. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and Well ID of CGWB well is not available in HGR compared with MIS and MIS. Village Name is not available in MIS for any of the Wells. Site Name is not available for any of the Wells in HGR. It is difficult to identify the CGWB well since its well ID, village name and Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) site name are not available in MIS. .

243

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies 3 CGWB wells are not available in Table 1 for observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water water level of HGR but it is available in Table 2 Level) and Table 2 of HGR.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and Pre and Post monsoon data for year 2019 is not compared with MIS. available in HGR and MIS. Table 1 does not provide any CGWB well for water level but 3 CGWB wells are found in Table of the HGR. Hence, the origin of the same needs Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) to be verified.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There is only one well under Table 1 for WQ, and observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water authenticity of data has been checked for only this Quality) and Table 3 well. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC/ TDS data is available in HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data Cation/ Anion data is available in HGR and MIS. given in HGR and compared with MIS. The MIS does not provide the Well ID, Village Name or Site Name of the lone well which is being monitored for WQ; but the lat-long data matches; hence, the data has been verified on the basis of the same. There are also 7 other wells in Table 3 which were not found in Table 1, and are Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) extra in Table 3.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (17). 244

2.5.8 Kabrai

State Uttar Pradesh District Mahoba Block Kabrai

Basic Information (5/5) Serial Demographic number Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete 4 Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Complete 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Ground Water Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (6/9) Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks Location map of the 1 Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the 2 Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for Information related to Wells used to monitoring water levels and measure water quality is missing; the water quality map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water quality 3 Available measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available Post-monsoon period The post monsoon map is same as Map 4 (Map showing distribution of Water 5 Not Available level in pre monsoon period) Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 degree Map showing the Electrical Celsius) in ground water Conductivity of Water in the Wells is 6 Not Available completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised 7 aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

245

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 13 2 0 1 Other Parameters Three of the villages mentioned in HGR do not Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies match with MIS; neither with the village name, observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and nor with Site Name. These are Kabrai, Srinagar, compared with MIS and Mahoba. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude matches perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between the MIS and HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Well ID MHB12 is not mentioned in HGR but it observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and is available in MIS. compared with MIS Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

246

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water The Well found under Table 1 (WQ) is not Quality) and Table 3 present in Table 3. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Well which was present in Table 1 for water quality is nor present in Table 3. Hence, this parameter is incomplete and the data has not been checked for authenticity. The extra wells which are present in Table 3 are not found in Table 1 Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (15).

247

2.5.9 Kandhala

State Uttar Pradesh District Khandala Block Kandhala

Basic Information (5/5)

Serial number Demographic Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete 4 Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Complete 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Groundwater Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and 3 Available Water quality measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 degree Celsius) in ground water Map showing the Electrical Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

248

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 )

Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Village Names are not available in MIS. All the observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS comparison has been done with Site Names. For the Kandhala Wells, the Village name is absent in MIS; rather, the site name is given. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Hence, the village names of HGR have been observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, compared with the Site Name of MIS. One village and compared with MIS (Kandhala) cannot be found in MIS. Latitude and Longitude of Well in Kandhala Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Village is not available in MIS. The other data observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as which is available for the rest of the wells match given in HGR, and compared with MIS perfectly. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and Well ID of Well in Kandhala Village is not compared with MIS available. The well which is present in Kandhala is not Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) found in the MIS at all.

249

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (0/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All the Wells which are present in Table 1 for WL Level) and Table 2. are present in Table 2. Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level data is not Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post available for 2019. Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and The Water Level data is not present for most of compared with MIS. the wells between the years 2015-2019. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Well ID is not available for the WQ Well in Table observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water 1 and Table 3. Hence, the comparison has been Quality) and Table 3. made on the basis of village name Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC Data is Available from 2015-18. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation/Anion Data is Available from 2015-2018. There are 11 extra wells in Table 3 which are not mentioned in Table 1 under WQ, but are found in Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) Table 3.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16.5).

250

2.5.10 Karvi

State Uttar Pradesh District Chitrakoot Block Karvi

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available 2 Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water 3 Available quality measurement. Pre-monsoon period 4 Available Post-monsoon period 5 Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ cm at Map showing the Electrical 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the Wells is completely 6 Not Available missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

251

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2)

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies MIS does not have any Village Names; hence the observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and comparison has been done between Village Name compared with MIS and Site Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude matches between MIS given in HGR, and compared with MIS and HGR. Well IDs of CGWB wells for WL are different in MIS but 2 wells match through Village Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies 1 well with well ID - W251230080553001 observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and (village name - Roli kalyanpur) is not found in compared with MIS HGR Table 1, but is present in the MIS.

Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

252

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies CGWB wells have mentioned different Well IDs observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water in Table 1 and 2. Hence, the comparison has been Level) and Table 2 done on the basis of village name.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and WL data for the pre-post monsoon for year 2019 compared with MIS. is not available. The Water Level data needs a thorough check because most of the data points are not matching between HGR and MIS. This could be because of Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) data being rounded off, or data entry error.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There is no well ID given for the 1 CGWB well observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water being monitored for WQ. Hence, the comparison Quality) and Table 3 is done on the basis of village name. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC/ TDS data is available in HGR. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation/ Anion data is available in HGR. HGR Table 1 has just 1 well for WQ (Karwi). Table 3 of HGR mentions 27 other wells, the origins of which are unknown. MIS WQ data sheet does not provide the village name, site name and well ID of this 1 well which makes its comparison difficult with MIS. The analysis has hence been done on the basis of matching latitude Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) and longitude.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5). 253

2.5.11 Kharkhoda

State Uttar Pradesh District Meerut Block Kharkhoda

Basic Information (5/5) Serial number Demographic Complete/Incomplete 1 General Information Complete 2 Land Use Complete 3 Cropping Pattern (2019-2020) Complete 4 Irrigation Facilities (2019-2020) Complete 5 Geology and Hydrogeology Complete 6 Ground Water Conditions Complete 7 Ground Water Quality Complete 8 Ground Water Resources Complete 9 Water Related Schemes Complete 10 Ground Water Related Issues Complete

Maps (4.5/9) Serial Number Maps Available/Not available Remarks Location map of the 1 Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of 2 the Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for Information related to Wells used to monitoring water levels measure water quality is missing; the and water quality map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water 3 Available quality measurement Pre-monsoon period The pre monsoon map is same as Map 3 (Location of Wells for monitoring 4 Not Available Water levels and Water quality) Post-monsoon period The post monsoon map is same as Map 3 (Location of Wells for monitoring Water levels and Water 5 Not Available quality) Map showing Map showing the Electrical distribution of EC (µ S/ Conductivity of Water in the Wells is 6 cm at 25 in ground water Not Available completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer 7 groups (Optional) Not Available

254

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 )

Number of Wells

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude data matches perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between MIS and HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The Well ID data for two CGWB Wells are not observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and available in HGR. The village names of these two compared with MIS wells are Kharkhoda and Kaili. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

255

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The CGWB Wells in Table 1 do not specify any observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Well ID; hence, the comparison has been done on Level) and Table 2 the basis of Village Names.

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post The Water Level Data in HGR has been rounded Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and off. Data for year 2019 is not provided in HGR compared with MIS. and MIS. The lone CGWB well which is mentioned under WL in Table 1 is present in Table 2 under a Well Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) ID which is not specified in Table 1.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There is only well in Table 1 for WQ, hence, the observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water authenticity of data has been verified for only this Quality) and Table 3 well. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given EC/TDS data for year 2015 and 2019 is not in HGR and compared with MIS. provided in HGR. Cation/ Anion data for 2015 and 2019 is not Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data provided in HGR. given in HGR and compared with MIS. WQ MIS data sheet does not provide Well ID, village name and site name of this particular well but the latitude and longitude has been matched. There are 7 extra wells in Table 3 which were not Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) found in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (15.5).

256

2.5.12 Mahuva

State Uttar Pradesh District Banda Block Mahuva

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (6/9) Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks Location map of the 1 Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the 2 Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for Information related to Wells used to monitoring water levels and measure water quality is missing; the water quality map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water quality 3 Available measurement 4 Pre-monsoon period Available Post-monsoon period The post monsoon map is same as Map 4 (Map showing distribution of Water level 5 Not Available in pre monsoon period) Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 degree Map showing the Electrical Conductivity Celsius) in ground water of Water in the Wells is completely 6 Not Available missing Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised 7 aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

257

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 13 2 0 1 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All Villages except "Mahuva" in HGR match observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and with either the Village Name or Site Name in compared with MIS the MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Latitude and Longitude matches perfectly in all Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies the cases. observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Well IDs match perfectly in all the wells for Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies which the Well ID is given. For three wells, the observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and Well ID is not given in the HGR, because of compared with MIS which comparison is not possible. No major discrepancies were found, but minor issues are present for Well IDs and Village Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) Names.

258

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Well IDs match perfectly in most of the wells, Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies except that for two CGWB wells, the Well ID is observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water not available in Table1 but mentioned in Table2 Level) and Table 2 as W251853080233001 and W252220080283001. The Pre and Post monsoon data is rounded off in many wells in the HGR which makes the comparison with MIS difficult. Also for W251115080280001 the data in HGR is missing but present in MIS. For the Well W251140080285401 data is present in HGR but Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post absent in MIS. For the year 2019, the data is Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and completely missing in HGR, but some data points compared with MIS. are mentioned in MIS. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Only well is mentioned under WQ in Table 1, observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water which is available in Table 3; and the authenticity Quality) and Table 3 of data has been verified for only this one well. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. The Well under ‘Mahua’ in Table 1 does not technically match with any well in Table 3, because the spelling of the village name is different, viz, ‘Mahuva’ and ‘Mahuwa’. The spelling should be checked thoroughly because Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) the data given in both the cases are different.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (17). 259

2.5.13 Manikpur

State Uttar Pradesh District Chitrakoot Block Manikpur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring water Information related to Wells levels and water quality used to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and 3 Available Water quality measurement 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

260

Tables (6/6)

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude information given in HGR, and compared with MIS matches between MIS and HGR. One of the wells in Table 1 under WL does not have a well ID, hence it cannot be compared. Two wells in HGR ( Well ID- Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies CKT03 and CKT12 ) are found in MIS, with observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and different Well IDs- W250400081060001, compared with MIS W251330081022501 respectively. The well Data in HGR which is not found in MIS at all should be identified and marked Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) correctly.

261

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters 2 wells for WL from Table 1 does not match with Table 2 when compared on the basis of Well ID. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies These are CKT03 and CKT12, both of which are observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water CGWB Wells; hence the comparison has been Level) and Table 2 made on the basis of village name. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post The pre and post WL data has been rounded off Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and between HGR and MIS; which is why it does not compared with MIS. match perfectly, but are close to one another. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 1 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water There is only one well under WQ in Table 1, Quality) and Table 3 which is a CGWB Well. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. There are 16 extra wells in Table 3 which were Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) not present in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

262

2.5.14 Mau

State Uttar Pradesh District Chitrakoot Block Mau

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (6/9) Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks Location map of the 1 Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the 2 Block / taluk Available Locations of wells for Information related to Wells used to monitoring water levels and measure water quality is missing; the map water quality only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and 3 Available Water quality measurement 4 Pre-monsoon period Available Post-monsoon period The post monsoon map is same as Map 4 (Map showing distribution of Water level 5 Not Available in pre monsoon period) Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 in ground Map showing the Electrical Conductivity water of Water in the Wells is completely 6 Not Available missing. Map showing Cross – section of subsurface regionalised 7 aquifer groups (Optional) Not Available

263

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 )

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Village name is not present in the MIS, however observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and the site name is matching with the village name in compared with MIS HGR except for two villages. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The Latitude and Longitude data matches given in HGR, and compared with MIS perfectly between HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies All SGWB wells perfectly match with the wells in observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and MIS but well IDs for CGWB wells are different compared with MIS when compared to MIS. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

264

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 1 0 Other Parameters All SGWB wells perfectly match between Table 1 (for WL) and Table 2. One CGWB Well under Table 1 (for WL) is not found in Table 2. Also, the Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Well IDs do not match for 2 CGWB wells. Hence, observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for the comparison was made on the basis of village Water Level) and Table 2 names. No data is available for the year 2019 in both MIS Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post and HGR. Moreover, when the comparison was Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and made for the existing data of wells, it was observed compared with MIS. that the values given in the MIS were rounded off. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Well ID for the particular well (of Village- Mau) observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for monitored for WQ is not present in Table 3. Hence Water Quality) and Table 3 the comparison is done on the basis of Village name. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data EC/TDS for the given well matches perfectly with given in HGR and compared with MIS. MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data Cation/Anion for the given well matches perfectly given in HGR and compared with MIS. with MIS.

There is only one well in Table 1 for WQ. Well ID, latitude and longitude and site names are not given for the well in both HGR and MIS. Also, In Table 1 no SGWB well has been mentioned for Water Quality, but 19 SGWB wells are present in Table 3. Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any)

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (17).

265

2.5.15 Maudaha

State Uttar Pradesh District Hamirpur Block Maudaha

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9) Serial Available/Not Number Maps available Remarks Location map of the Block/Taluk 1 Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / taluk 2 Available Locations of wells for Information related to Wells used to monitoring water levels and measure water quality is missing; the water quality map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water 3 Available quality measurement Pre-monsoon period 4 Available Post-monsoon period 5 Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 in ground Map showing the Electrical water Conductivity of Water in the Wells is 6 Not Available completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available 266

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 9 3 0 1 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The Village Name is not available in MIS; hence, observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and the comparison has been done between the compared with MIS Village Name of HGR and Site Name of MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude data is matching given in HGR, and compared with MIS perfectly between MIS and HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Well IDs of CGWB wells are not matching observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and because different IDs are written under CGWB compared with MIS WL wells in HGR and MIS. The well IDs should ideally be the same across MIS and HGR, and also in all the Tables within Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) the HGR.

267

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0

Other Parameters Well IDs for CGWB wells not matching in Table 1 and Table 2. Hence, comparison has been done Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies on the basis of village name. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water One CGWB well mentioned in Table 2 is not Level) and Table 2 mentioned in Table 1. Pre and Post Monsoon Data is not available for the year 2019 in both HGR and MIS. For CGWB Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post wells, Pre and post monsoon data is not available Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and for some years in MIS which is making the compared with MIS. comparison between HGR and MIS difficult. Pre and Post Monsoon data for all the wells is matching for the year 2015 to 2018. For 2019, Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) some data is available in MIS but not in HGR.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There is only one well under Table 1 for WQ; observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water hence, the data has been checked for only this Quality) and Table 3 well. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC/ TDS data is available in HGR. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation/ Anion data is available in HGR. MIS does not provide well ID, Village name and site name for this particular well which makes its comparison difficult. There is only one WQ well in Table 1, but 21 WQ Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) wells in Table 3.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

268

2.5.16 Mauranipur

State Uttar Pradesh District Jhansi Block Mauranipur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used water levels and water quality to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water quality 3 Available measurement 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 degree Celsius) in ground Conductivity of Water in the 6 water Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

269

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2) Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 5 3 0 1 Other Parameters Village Name for 7 wells is not available in MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Hence, the comparison of village names in HGR is observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared with site names in MIS. (Kuangaon compared with MIS village) is not available in MIS WL data sheet. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Site Name is not available for HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Latitude and Longitude values for 1 well are not observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as found in MIS; the well present in Kuangaon is not given in HGR, and compared with MIS found in MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and In HGR, 2 CGWB WL Well IDs do not match with compared with MIS the Well IDs of MIS. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any)

270

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (0/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 1 0 Other Parameters Well ID of CGWB wells are different in both Table 1 and Table 2. Hence, comparison has been done on the basis of village name. One CGWB well present Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies in Table 1 is not mentioned in MIS as well as in observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Table 2 of HGR. This well is present in the village Level) and Table 2 Rewan. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Pre and Post Monsoon Data for 2019 is not Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and available in HGR and also there is data mismatch compared with MIS. found for numerous data points. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There is only 1 CGWB well being monitored for observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water WQ which is present in Table 3 of HGR and is also Quality) and Table 3 matching with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC/ TDS data is available in HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation/ Anion data is available in HGR and MIS. MIS WQ data sheet does not provide Well ID, Village name and Site name of this well for CGWB but the well has been matched through the latitude and longitude. There is only WQ well in Table 1, but 14 extra Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) wells in Table 3.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16.5)

271

2.5.17 Muskara

State Uttar Pradesh District Hamirpur Block Muskara

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used water levels and water quality to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water 3 Available quality measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the Wells 6 Not Available is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

272

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells

No. of wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level No. of Wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring for Water Level Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 4 6 0 1 Other Parameters Village Name data is not available in MIS for 9 wells. For some of the wells, Site Name Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed instead of Village Name has been given, hence in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared the comparison has been done with the help of with MIS both, Village Name and Site Name. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS The Latitude and Longitude data is missing in MIS for 6 wells. The data which is available does not match between MIS and HGR to Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed perfection. This is a major error because the in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, latitude and longitude should match correctly and compared with MIS since they give the exact location of the wells. Two wells in HGR :HMR14 and HMR07 A Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed are present in the MIS with different Well IDs. in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with There are also missing Well IDs in HGR and MIS MIS which is why analysis is not possible. The Table 1 data does not match with MIS to a great extent. There are discrepancies in village/site name, latitude and longitude as Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) well as Well IDs.

273

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 3 0 Other Parameters

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Three of the CGWB well in Table 1 under WL observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water not found in Table 2. 1 CGWB well mentioned in Level) and Table 2 Table 2 is not found in Table 1. Water level data is missing for 2015 and 2019 in HGR and MIS. The data which is present in HGR Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post has been rounded off, which is why the data Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and between the HGR and MIS does not match compared with MIS. perfectly. The well ID data does not match in many cases which makes it hard for comparison. The comparison has hence been done on the basis of Village Name; and well IDs for the wells which Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) have these specified.

274

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Well ID is not mentioned for 1 well which is Quality) and Table 3 considered for Water Quality. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given The EC data for CGWB well of Muskara village in HGR and compared with MIS. is not available in the MIS for comparison. The Cation/Anion data for CGWB well of Comments and/or remarks for Cations/Anions Muskara village is not available in the MIS for data given in HGR and compared with MIS. comparison. There is only one well which is present in both Table 1 (for WQ) and Table 3. Hence, the comparison of data between HGR and MIS has been done for only this particular well. The existence of the other 14 wells mentioned in Table Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) 3 should be verified.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

275

2.5.18 Naraini

State Uttar Pradesh District Banda Block Naraini

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used water levels and water quality to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water 3 Available quality measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the Wells 6 Not Available is completely missing Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

276

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 7 7 0 1 Other Parameters For 75% of the wells, Village Name is not available in MIS. Hence, the comparison of Village name has been done with both, Village Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies name and Site Name of MIS. Five villages, observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and namely Naraini, Naraini New, Attara, Roli compared with MIS Kalyanpur, and Pangara are not found in MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as Latitude and longitude data is not available for given in HGR, and compared with MIS five wells in MIS . Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Well ID of CGWB wells are not available in observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and HGR. Well ID of 4 wells that are found in MIS compared with MIS are not matching anywhere with the HGR. Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) .

277

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 3 0 Other Parameters All SGWB wells are matching. For CGWB, well ID is not available in Table 1 for 7 wells. Hence, the comparison has been done with BOTH, the village name and well ID. After this analysis, the Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies wells in the villages Naraini New and Attara and observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Pangara do not match between Tables 1 (WL) and Level) and Table 2 Table 2. 8 Data points are available for 7 wells out of 11 wells. Well in Attara Village is questionable since none of the data points are matching. For 2019, Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post pre and post water level, Data points are available Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and for 4 CGWB Wells in MIS, but they are not compared with MIS. available in HGR. For CGWB wells, Well ID is not traceable. Data points are available in MIS and HGR which are Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) not matching, and have been highlighted.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies There is only WQ well in Table 1 (CGWB); observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water which matches with Table 3. The authenticity of Quality) and Table 3 data for only this well has been checked. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. There are 9 extra wells in Table 3 which were not Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) present in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

278

2.5.19 Panwari

State Uttar Pradesh District Mahoba Block Panwari

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used water levels and water quality to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water 3 Available quality measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 degree Celsius) in ground Conductivity of Water in the Wells 6 water Not Available is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

279

Tables (6 /6)

280

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 for Water Level but absent in Table 2. Table 1 for Water Level but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters CGWB wells are mentioned with different Well IDs in Table 1 and Table 2. Hence, the comparison Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies has been done on the basis of Village Name. 1 observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water CGWB well is mentioned in Table 2 for WL but Level) and Table 2 not in Table 1..

Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Most of the wells either do not have any data points Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and for Water level given in HGR under several years; compared with MIS. the data for 2019 is completely missing.

Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which exactly match Number of SGWB Wells which exactly match between Table 1 for Water Quality and Table 2. between Table 1 for Water Quality and Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Well ID not provided in Table 1 and Table 3. Quality) and Table 3 Comparison done on basis of village name Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC Data is Available. Comments and/or remarks for Cation/Anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation/Anion Data is Available. There are 2 village Panwari in Table 3. 5 year WQ data is available for only one of the wells. The same has been considered. There are four extra wells in Table 3 which are not Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) present in Table 1.

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

281

2.5.20 Pilana

State Uttar Pradesh District Baghpat Block Pilana

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (6/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used water levels and water quality to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water 3 Available quality measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Not Available The map is completely missing. Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the Wells 6 Not Available is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

282

Tables (6/6)

283

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The Well ID of CGWB well for WL in Table 1 is observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water not matching with the CGWB well in Table 2. But Level) and Table 2 matched on the basis of village name. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post The Water Level data needs major checking Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and because a huge number of discrepancies have compared with MIS. been observed. The data points are rounded off. The Pre and Post Water Level data has not been Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) given for the year 2019.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters There is only one well mentioned under Table 1 WQ, which is present in Table 3. The Well ID is not available for this particular well in both Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Table1 and Table 3, they are matched on the basis observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water of Village name.The authenticity of the data has Quality) and Table 3 been checked for only this well. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given The EC data for the Well Name Pilana for CGWB in HGR and compared with MIS. is not available in MIS for comparison Comments and/or remarks for Cation/Anion data The cation/anion data for the Well Name Pilana given in HGR and compared with MIS. for CGWB is not available in MIS for comparison There is only one well which is present in both Table1 (WQ) and Table3. Hence, the comparison of data between HGR & MIS has been done for only this particular well. The existence of the other 6 wells mentioned in Table 3 needs to be Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) verified.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (17).

284

2.5.21 Rajpura

State Uttar Pradesh District Meerut Block Rajpura

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Not number Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used water levels and water quality to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water 3 Available quality measurement 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the Wells 6 Not Available is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

285

Tables (6/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2/2) Number of Wells No. of wells under SGWB No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 10 0 0 1 Other Parameters Village Names are not available in MIS, hence the comparison has been done with both, Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed Village name and Site Name. Only one village in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared "Rajpura" does not match between HGR and with MIS MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, Latitude 28.3 and Longitude 78.3 in HGR are and compared with MIS not matching with any of the values in MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with Well ID of 1 CGWB well for WQ is not MIS available in HGR and MIS. Well ID of CGWB well is not available in Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) HGR and MIS.

286

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters There is only one CGWB WQ Well in Table 1 which is present in Table 3 and has been matched Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies on the basis of village name because the well ID observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water for the same well has not been provided in HGR Quality) and Table 3 and MIS.

EC/ TDS data is available in HGR. Data for year Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given 2019 is not provided in HGR and MIS for this in HGR and compared with MIS. well. Cation/ Anion data is available in HGR. Data for Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data year 2019 is not provided in HGR and MIS for given in HGR and compared with MIS. this well. Well ID of CGWB is not available in HGR and also well ID, Site Name and village name is not provided in MIS. There are 24 extra WQ Wells in Table 3 which Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) are not present in Table 1.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

287

2.5.22 Ramnagar

State Uttar Pradesh District Chitrakoot Block Ramnagar

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used water levels and water quality to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water quality 3 Available measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

288

Tables (4/6)

(Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) ( 2/2 ) Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level No. of Wells under CGWB SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Monitoring for Water Level Monitoring Quality Monitoring Quality Monitoring 10 2 0 1 Other Parameters Village name is not provided in the MIS data sheet. Hence, the comparison is done between village name in HGR and site name in MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed There is only one village named Manikpur in Village Names, as given in HGR, and compared (CGWB WQ well) which is not given in MIS with MIS WQ data sheet. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed Latitude and longitude for 1 CGWB WQ well in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as given in HGR, is not matching with MIS. Hence, the and compared with MIS comparison is difficult. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed Only 1 well ID in MIS is not matching with in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and compared with the well ID of HGR, that is, MIS W251342081090001. 1 CGWB WQ well has no well ID in HGR Table 1 and also its basic data, that is, Village name, site name and well ID is missing in MIS. Hence, the comparison with MIS is Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) difficult..

289

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters 1 CGWB well for WL has a different well ID in Table 2 but the village name (Rajpura) is the Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies same. Another CGWB well for WL provides no observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water well ID in Table 1 but has the same in Table 2 Level) and Table 2 (village name - Ramnagar Pz GWD). Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and Pre and Post monsoon water level data of 2019 is compared with MIS. not given in HGR. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 0/2) Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 1 0 Other Parameters There is only one village named Manikpur which is there in Table-1 and is given for water quality Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies but it does not match with the data of Table-3. As observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Table-1 is a superset for Table 3 so, the Table is Quality) and Table 3 incomplete. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Data available in Table-1 is not given in Table-3 which makes the verification impossible. Either the Table 1 or Table 3 should be verified Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) and corrected.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16.5).

290

2.5.23 Sarila

State Uttar Pradesh District Hamirpur Block Sarila

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Maps Available/Unav Number ailable Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used water levels and water quality to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows information related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water quality 3 Available measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

291

Tables (4/6)

Basic Data of Wells: Table 1 (Sub parameter 1) (2 /2 ) Number of Wells No. of wells under No. of Wells under No. of wells under No. of wells under SGWB for Water Level CGWB for Water Level SGWB for Water CGWB for Water Quality Monitoring Monitoring Quality Monitoring Monitoring 3 4 3 1 Other Parameters There are five villages in the HGR, which do not Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies match with the data in MIS, either with the observed in Village Names, as given in HGR, and Village name or the GP. These are: Msidan, compared with MIS Chhibauli, Sarila, Mamna, and Chandaut. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Site Name of Wells, as given in HGR, and compared with MIS It is difficult to compare the latitude and longitude Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies data between MIS and HGR because the names of observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as most of the villages which are present in HGR are given in HGR, and compared with MIS missing from the MIS Three of the CGWB Wells in the HGR have no Well IDs, which is why the comparison with the Well IDs given in MIS is difficult. However, the number of extra Well IDs in the MIS is also three, which means that these are the ones which should Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies match with the IDs in HGR. Two of the wells in observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and HGR, HMR08 and HMR11 are found in the MIS compared with MIS with different well IDs. The Well IDs, being an important aspect of identifying the wells, should remain constant across the HGR and MIS. In this report, however, the data is either missing, does not match or Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) difficult to compare.

292

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 1 0 Other Parameters Two CGWB Wells which are mentioned under Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies WL in Table 1 have different Well IDs in Table 2. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water The CGWB well in "Mamna" under Table 1, WL Level) and Table 2 is not found in Table 2. The Water Level data is either missing in most of Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post the wells, or it does not match with MIS. The data Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and seems to have been rounded off, which is the compared with MIS. likely cause of the data mismatch. If the HGR is a subset of MIS, the data points in both of these sets should match to maximum extent. In the case of this report, most of the data under Table 2 is either absent from MIS or does not match across the wells through the years. This Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) needs to be verified.

293

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (0 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 3 Other Parameters There is only one CGWB Well in Table 1 which is for WQ which is found in Table 3 as well. SGWB on the other hand, has three WQ Wells in Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Table 1, none of which are found. Since the observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water number of matching wells in Table 1 and 3 is too Quality) and Table 3 low, this parameter is incomplete. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. TDS/EC Data is not available for other 3 wells. Comments and/or remarks for Cation/ Anion data Cation/Anion Data is not available for other 3 given in HGR and compared with MIS. wells. Table 1 being the superset of the entire report, should match with Table 2 and 3 individually. Since most of the wells in Table 1 for WQ are not found in Table 3, this parameter is incomplete. There are also 12 extra wells which are present in Table 3 which are not mentioned under WQ in Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) Table 1.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16.5).

294

2.5.24 Sumerpur

State Uttar Pradesh District Hamirpur Block Sumerpur

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5 /9)

Serial Available/Not Number Maps Available Remarks 1 Location map of the Block/Taluk Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used water levels and water quality to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water quality 3 Available measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC (µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

295

Tables (6/6)

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies The Latitude and Longitude data matches in observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as almost every case. For one of the wells Lat/Long given in HGR, and compared with MIS data is not available in MIS for comparison. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and Well ID is not matching for HMR18, HMR21 compared with MIS which are found in HGR but not present in MIS. Slight discrepancies have been found in Village Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) Name, Lat/long and Well IDs.

296

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Well IDs are not matching for 3 wells of CGWB, hence they have been matched on the basis of Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies village name. Two of the wells under CGWB observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water under Table 2 (for WL) are given which are not Level) and Table 2 present in Table 1. No data is available in HGR for 4 wells with Well IDs- W254525080071201, W254612080120801, W254903080090701, W254945080145501 for any of the mentioned years. Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post Data is not available for the year 2019 Pre and Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and Post monsoon Period. compared with MIS. Well ID HMR18 in Table1 is presented with a different well ID W254612080120801 In Table 2. Well ID HMR21 in Table1 is presented with a different Well ID W254945080145501 in Table2. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

297

2.5.25 Talbehat

State Uttar Pradesh District Lalitpur Block Talbehat

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

298

Tables (4/6)

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude data match perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between HGR and MIS. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and There is a mismatch found in Well IDs of two compared with MIS wells ( LTP04A and LTP12 ) The wells in HGR which do not match with MIS should either be tracked and matched with MIS, or if the Well ID has been changed in the HGR for Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) these wells, it should be kept uniform.

299

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (0 /2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Village Name for all the 3 wells are matching but Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Well IDs do not match at all for WL CGWB observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water wells. Some wells have been mentioned with Level) and Table 2 different well IDs. The pre and post monsoon water level data for the SGWB wells do not match between the HGR and MIS. The data for the CGWB wells, however, match Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post between HGR and MIS. Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and Despite this, the overall data matches does not compared with MIS. meet the threshold. Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any)

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) (2 /2)

Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies Well ID has not been given in Table 1 for WQ. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water The comparison of WQ Well has been done Quality) and Table 3 through the Village name. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC Data is Available. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data given in HGR and compared with MIS. Cation/Anion Data is Available. There are 16 extra wells in Table 3 which are not Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) present in Table 1 under WQ.

Conclusion

Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (16.5).

300

2.5.26 Tindwari

State Uttar Pradesh District Banda Block Tindwari

Basic Information (5/5)

Maps (7.5/9)

Serial Available/ Not number Demographics Available Remarks Location map of the Block/Taluk + 1 Admin details Available Hydrogeological map of the Block / 2 taluk Available Locations of wells for monitoring Information related to Wells used water levels and water quality to measure water quality is missing; the map only shows data related to wells which are involved in water level measurement. However, going by the header of the map, it should show both, the location of wells used for Water level measurement, and Water quality 3 Available measurement. 4 Pre-monsoon period Available 5 Post-monsoon period Available Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ Map showing the Electrical cm at 25 in ground water Conductivity of Water in the 6 Not Available Wells is completely missing. Map showing Cross – section of sub surface regionalised aquifer groups 7 (Optional) Not Available

301

Tables (6/6)

Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Latitude and Longitude of Wells, as The latitude and longitude match perfectly given in HGR, and compared with MIS between MIS and HGR. Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies observed in Wells IDs, as given in HGR, and Well ID for CGWB wells are not available in compared with MIS HGR. Village Name for SGWB wells are not available in MIS. Site Name for all the wells are not available in HGR. Well ID for CGWB wells are Overall Comments for Table 1 (if any) not available in HGR.

302

Historical Data of Water Level through 2015-2019: Table 2 (Subparameter 2) (2/2) Number of Wells Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. Table 1 (for WL) but absent in Table 2. 0 0 Other Parameters Well ID for CGWB wells are not available in Table 1 of HGR. One CGWB well mentioned in Table 2 provides the well ID but has been Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies compared on the basis of village name. observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water All SGWB wells being monitored for water level Level) and Table 2 are present in Table 2. Pre and Post Monsoon water level values for 2019 Comments and/or remarks for Pre and Post are not available in MIS and HGR. Few extra Monsoon Water Level Data given in HGR and points for CGWB wells are available in MIS but compared with MIS. not in HGR. Well ID for CGWB wells are not available in Table 1 of HGR. Pre and Post Monsoon data for Overall Comments for Table 2 (if any) 2019 is not available both in MIS and HGR.

Water Quality Data: Table 3 (Subparameter 3) ( 2/2)

Number of Wells

Number of CGWB Wells which are present in Number of SGWB Wells which are present in Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. Table 1 (for WQ) but absent in Table 3. 0 0 Other Parameters Well IDs are not available in Table 1 and 3 of HGR for CGWB well which is being monitored for water quality. Hence, the comparison has been Comments and/or remarks for discrepancies done on the basis of the Village Name that is observed in Well IDs given in Table 1 (for Water Tindwari. Water quality data is available in MIS Quality) and Table 3 for this village. Comments and/or remarks for TDS/EC data given in HGR and compared with MIS. EC/TDS data is available in HGR for all 5 years. Comments and/or remarks for cation/anion data Cation/Anion data is available in HGR for all 5 given in HGR and compared with MIS. years. No village name, site name and well ID is given in the MIS WQ data sheet for this particular well of this block. There are 5 extra wells which are Overall Comments for Table 3 (if any) present in Table 3 but are not found in Table 1.

Conclusion Based on the findings, the total score of the report is (18.5).

303

Part 3: State Specific Observations

304

3.1 Gujarat

Parameter (Basic Informati Number of reports on/Maps/ where the discrepancy Tables) Sub-parameter Type of Discrepancy was observed Percentage

Map showing the Hydrogeological Hydrogeological Map of map of the Block the Block/ Taluk is Maps / taluk (Map 2) completely missing. 1 100

Map showing 100 distribution of EC Map showing the (µ S/ cm at 25 Electrical Conductivity degrees Celsius) of Water in the in ground water Observation Wells is Maps (Map 6) completely missing. 1

Huge discrepancy found 100 in the comparison of water level (table 2) data. Table 2 The data points did not match between MIS WL Tables data sheet and HGR. 1

3.2 Karnataka

Parameter (Basic Information/ Number of reports Maps/Tables where the discrepancy ) Sub-parameter Type of Discrepancy was observed Percentage

CGWB Wells not Table 1 Tables mentioned at all 19 95

Information regarding Table 1 Water Quality monitored wells not given in Table Tables 1 5 25

305

3.3 Madhya Pradesh

Parameter (Basic Information/ Number of reports Maps/Tables Sub- where the discrepancy ) parameter Type of Discrepancy was observed Percentage

The EC Map available mentions that it gives the data of pre monsoon EC Map showing in groundwater. Going by distribution of the same, the post EC(µ S/ cm at monsoon EC should be 25 degrees given in a separate map; Celsius) in or, only one map for all ground water 12 months should be Maps (Map 6) given. 9 100

Tables Table 2 2015 data missing 4 44.44

Tables Table 3 2015 data missing 6 66.66

Wells for Water Quality do not match beteween Tables Table 2 Tables 1 and 3. 5 55.55

3.4 Maharashtra

Parameter (Basic Number of reports Information/M Sub- where the discrepancy aps/Tables) parameter Type of Discrepancy was observed Percentage

Irrigation Basic Facilities (Only the table is present, 3 Information (2019- without any data within 2020) it.) 7.894736842

(Only Net Irrigated Area Irrigation is present; information Basic Facilities regarding Gross Irrigated 1 Information (2019- Area and methods of 2020) Irrigation is absent.) 2.631578947

306

Hydrogeolo gical map The Hydrogeological Map Maps of the Block 3 is completely missing. / taluk (Map 2) 7.894736842

Locations of Information related to observation Observation wells used to wells for monitor Ground Water is Maps monitoring present; however, it does 30 water levels not specify Water Level and water and/or Water Quality quality wells. (Map 3) 78.94736842

Locations of observation Map showing the location wells for of Observation Wells for Maps monitoring Water Level and Water 7 water levels Quality is completely and water missing. quality (Map 3) 18.42105263

Locations of observation Map related to the wells for location of observation Maps monitoring wells to monitor Water 1 water levels level and Water quality is and water same as Map 1 quality (Map 3) 2.631578947

Pre Map showing pre- Monsoon monsoon Water Level Maps Water 1 Distribution is completely Level Map missing. (Map 4) 2.631578947

Pre Monsoon Maps Water Map is available but the 1 Level Map village names present in (Map 4) the map are not sufficient. 2.631578947

Map showing post- Post monsoon Water Level Maps Monsoon 1 Distribution is completely Water missing. 2.63 Level Map

307

(Map 5)

Post Monsoon Maps Water Map is available but the 1 Level Map village names mentioned (Map 5) in map are not sufficient. 2.63

Map showing distribution Map showing the of EC(µ S/ Electrical Conductivity of cm at 25 Maps Water in the Observation degrees Wells is completely Celsius) in missing. ground water (Map 6) 12 31.57

Map showing distribution Map showing the of EC(µ S/ Electrical Conductivity is cm at 25 Maps present, but does not show degrees the information about Celsius) in observation wells. ground water (Map 6) 13 34.21

The CGWB Wells do not Tables Table 1 specify the purpose of 15 monitoring 39.47

The SGWB Wells mentioned in Table 1 do not specify that they are Tables Table 3 being monitored for 35 Water Quality as well; but the same wells are mentioned in Table 3. 92.10

308

3.5 Uttar Pradesh

Parameter Number of (Basic reports where the Information/M discrepancy was aps/Tables) Sub-parameter Type of Discrepancy observed Percentage

Information related to Observation wells used to measure water quality is Locations of missing; the map only shows data observation related to wells which are involved in wells for water level measurement. However, monitoring going by the header of the map, it water levels and should show both, the location of wells water quality used for Water level measurement, and Maps (Map 3) Water quality measurement. 24 92.30

Locations of observation wells for monitoring water levels and water quality Map 1 has been given instead of Map Maps (Map 3) 3. 1 3.84

Locations of observation wells for monitoring water levels and Map showing the Location of Wells for water quality monitoring Water Level and Water Maps (Map 3) Quality is completely missing. 1 3.84

Pre Monsoon Water Level Map 1 has been given instead of under Maps Map (Map 4) Map 4 1 3.84

The pre monsoon map is same as Map Pre Monsoon 3 (Location of Observation Wells for Water Level monitoring Water levels and Water Maps Map (Map 4) quality) 1 3.84

Post Monsoon Water Level Map 1 has been given instead of under Maps Map (Map 5) Map 5 1 3.84

The post monsoon map is same as Map Post Monsoon 3 (Location of Observation Wells for Water Level monitoring Water levels and Water Maps Map (Map 5) quality) 1 3.84

309

Post Monsoon Post monsoon map is same as Map 4 Water Level ((Map showing distribution of Water Maps Map (Map 5) level in pre monsoon period) 5 19.23

Post Monsoon Water Level The Post monsoon water level map is Maps Map (Map 5) completely missing 1 3.84

Map showing distribution of EC(µ S/ cm at 25 degrees Map showing the Electrical Celsius) in Conductivity of Water in the ground water Observation Wells is completely Maps (Map 6) missing. 26 100

The CGWB Wells have different Well Tables Table 2 IDs in Tables 1 and 2 20 76.92

Tables Table 2 2019 Water Level Data not given 26 100

Extra wells in Table 3 which were not Tables Table 3 mentioned in Table 1 26 100

310

Part 4: Ideal Hydrogeological

Report*

*Please refer to the Report assessment for detailed observations and comments.

ATAL BHUJAL YOJANA (ATAL JAL )

STATE : MADHYA PRADESH

DEPARTMENT : WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT

‘HYDROGEOLOGICAL REPORT’

BLOCK : Niwari

DISTRICT : Niwari

YEAR : 2019-20

Towards partial fulfilment of requirements for Disbursement of incentives under DLI-1

DATE OF DISCLOUSER 01 APRIL 2020

Approved By Prepared & Submitted By

Project Director Senior Geohydrologist SPMU, Atal Bhujal Yojana, M.P. Divisional Ground Water Survey Unit No. 3, Sagar, M.P.

HYDROGEOLOGICAL REPORT (YEAR: 2019-20)

STATE : Madhya Pradesh DISTRICT : Niwari BLOCK / TALUK : Niwari BLOCK / TALUK HQs : Niwari

A - GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Geographical Area : 668.00 Sq. Km. 2. No. of Gram Panchayats : 71 3. No. of Towns : 2 4. No. of Villages : 140 5. Population (Census 2011) : Male Female Total : 90706 81636 172342 6.Rainfall (mm) : Monsoon Non-Monsoon Annual : 1209.50 324.50 1534

River Basin : Ganga Basin / Yamuna Sub Basin Major soil types : Black Humus Granite type, yellowish, gray colour kankar

B. LAND USE 1. Forest Area (Ha) : 22126 2. Culturable Area ( Ha ) : 43720 3. Net sown Area (Ha) : 39284 4. Gross Cropped Area ( Ha) : 61115

C. CROPPING PATTERN ( As in 2019-20 ) 1. Major Crops grown Kharif Rabi Summer Perennial Soyabean Wheat Moong Seasam Mustard Groundnut Grams Urad Barley Maize Peas

D. IRRIGATION FACILITIES (As in 2019-20 ) 1. Net irrigated Area (Ha) 38768 2. Gross Irrigated Area ( Ha) 46046 TANK/ DW BW/TW CANALS OTHERS 3. Area under irrigation (Ha) Source PONDS wise 22163 7038 3932 10110 2803 E. GEOLOGY & HYDROLOGY Predominant Rock type : Hard Rock- Bundelkhand Granite Major Geological formation : Bundelkhand Granite and Gniesses of Archean Age Important water-bearing formation : Fractured / Weathered Granite Status of coverage under NAQUIM : Covered

F GROUND WATER RELATED CONDITION 1 No. of wells used for water level Open Well BW/TW/PZ (WL) monitoring CGWB SGWB Total CGWB SGWB Total 01 15 16 01 04 05 2 Monitoring mechanism (Nos.) Manual DWLR TELEMETRY CGWB SGWB CGWB SGWB CGWB SGWB 02 19 0 0 0 0 3 Monitoring frequency Agency No of times monitored/year CGWB 4 SGWB 4 4 Period of water level data Agency Period of WL data availability(From -To ) availability. From (Year) To ( year ) CGWB 1974 2020 SGWB 1984 2020 5 Water level range (m. bgl) Minimum/ Village Maximum/ Village Pre- monsoon (April-May2019) 5.1m_bgl/Chakarpur 13.05m_bgl/Mudara Post-monsoon (November 2019) 1.60m_bgl/Urdora 9.65m_bgl/Gurh Kudar 6 Seasonal WL fluctuation range Minimum/ Village Maximum/ Village (m) 2.20m_bgl/Gurh Kudar 8.35m_bgl/Niwari

G GROUND WATER QUALITY 1 No. of wells used for water Open Well BW/TW/PZ quality (WQ) monitoring CGWB SGWB Total CGWB SGWB Total

01 15 16 01 04 05 2 Monitoring frequency Agency No of times monitored/year CGWB 1 during May( Pre-monsoon)

SGWB 2 (Pre & Post Monsoon) 3 Period of water quality data Agency Period of WQ data availability (years ) availability. CGWB 2010-2019 SGWB 2010-2019 4 Parameters analysed Agency Parameters analysed CGWB 13 parameters-pH, EC, CO3, HCO3,Cl, SO4, NO3, F, Ca, Mg, Na, K, Total Hardness SGWB 13 Parameters 5 Known grown ground water Isolated Pockets of Nitrate and Fluoride quality issues ,if any

H GROUND WATER RESOURES 1 Latest Assessment Year 2017 2 Assessment Unit Block 3 Annual Extractable GW Resource (ham) 6197.14 4 Current Annual GW Resource (ham) 4666.3 5 Net GW Availability for future use (ham) Allocation- Domestic - 765, Irrigation-1181.21 6 Stage of GW Extraction (%) 75.30%

7 Category of block / taluk /2017 Semi – Critical 8 Category of block / taluk /in previous 2013 2011 2009 2004 assessments Semi Semi Semi Semi Critical Critical Critical Critical

I WATER-RELATED SCHEMES 1 Schemes with a bearing on ground water, being implemented in the block /taluk Centrally Sponsored/ Central i) MGNREGS ( 60 % Part Budget ) Sector Scheme ii) PMKSY-WDC

iii) PMKSY-PDMC iv) BUNDELKHAND PACKAGE State Scheme i) MGNREGS ( 40 % Part Budget ) ii) -

iii) - iv) -

J GROUND WATER RELATED ISSUES 1 GROUND WATER RELATED ISSUES OF THE BLOCK i) Issues related to GW : Sustainability issues Availability ii) Issues related to GW : Isolated Pockets of Nitrate and Fluoride quality iii) Other issues if any : - TABLE - 1 BASIC DATA OF WATER LEVEL (WL)/WATER QUALITY (WQ) WELLS

State Madhya Pradesh District Niwari Block Niwari

) S. Well No. Name of Latitude Longitude )

No. Village

/PZ)

WQ)

m.agl

SGWD) CGWB/ CGWB/

(m.amsl) Lithology

of Purpose

monitoring monitoring

Monitoring Monitoring

Type of well of well Type

Point ( Point

Diameter (m Diameter

Depth (m.bgl) Depth

Aquifer type / type Aquifer

Reduced Level Level Reduced

Agency ( Agency

(WL/WQ/ WL & WL (WL/WQ/

(DW/ BW/ TW (DW/BW/

DW/LR/ Telemetry) DW/LR/

Height of Measuring Measuring of Height mechanism (Manual/ (Manual/ mechanism 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 TKM001-OW Jijora 25° 25' 55.042" 78° 40' 1.223" D. W 213.18 Phreatic/Granite 0.5 13.9 4.90 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 2 TKM002-OW Baghat 25° 28' 4.474" 78° 46' 52.251" D. W 180.625 Phreatic/Granite 1.2 10.3 4.40 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 3 TKM003-OW Orcha 25°21'06" 78°38'23" D. W 215.73 Phreatic/Granite 0.95 17.35 4.50 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 4 TKM0004-OW Taricher Kala 25° 24' 33.877" 78° 53' 31.945" D. W 228.995 Phreatic/Granite 1 10.9 4.20 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 5 TKM005-OW Sendri 25° 31' 23.788" 78° 54' 23.431" D. W 199.775 Phreatic/Granite 0.7 10.55 7.00 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 6 TKM007-OW Niwari 25°20'50" 78°48'11" D. W 236.77 Phreatic/Granite 1.95 11.9 4.40 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 7 TKM008-OW Teharka 25° 17' 36.733" 78° 55' 17.763" D. W 261.36 Phreatic/Granite 0.4 6.8 4.20 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 8 TKM061-OW Ladwari 25° 15' 47.100" 78° 45' 7.260" D. W 248.35 Phreatic/Granite 1.55 9.6 2.77 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 9 TKM062-OW Kuluwa 25° 17' 55.117" 78° 46' 43.252" D. W 238.72 Phreatic/Granite 1.05 14.6 2.90 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 10 TKM063A-OW Mudara 25° 21' 33.852" 78° 50' 18.710" D. W 239.74 Phreatic/Granite 0.5 13.5 3.90 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 11 TKM064-OW Urdora 25° 19' 43.391" 78° 55' 15.519" D. W 219.43 Phreatic/Granite 0.5 5.2 5.00 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 12 TKM065-OW Chakarpur 25° 17' 20.088" 78° 31' 6.511" D. W 217.6 Phreatic/Granite 0.7 11.15 3.45 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 13 TKM066A-OW Puchhi karguwa 25° 27' 7.059" 78° 49' 32.052" D. W 189.18 Phreatic/Granite 0.85 12.65 3.60 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 14 TKM067-OW Shakti Bhauro 25° 30' 12.166" 78° 50' 59.067" D. W 189.375 Phreatic/Granite 1.7 10.1 4.45 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 15 TKM075-OW Gurh Kudar 25⁰29'14" 79⁰54'38" D. W 213.76 Phreatic/Granite 0.9 13.05 2.90 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 16 Tikm001-PZ Orchha 25° 21' 11.22" 78° 38' 12.17" B.W 220.07 Phreatic/Granite 1 30 0.15 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 17 Tikm002-PZ Mudara 25° 21' 33.85" 78° 50' 18.71" B.W 232.56 Phreatic/Granite 1 30 0.15 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 18 Tikm003-PZ Uboura 25° 25' 35.59" 78° 54' 41.05" B.W 233.76 Phreatic/Granite 1 30 0.15 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD 19 Tikm005-PZ Niwari 25° 21' 16.68" 78° 48' 15.00" B.W 239.48 Phreatic/Granite 1 30 0.15 W.L. & W.Q Manual SGWD

20 W252045078480001 Niwari (D) 25° 21' 08.99" 78° 48' 20.00" B.W. - Phreatic/Granite - 62 - W.L. & W.Q Manual CGWB

21 W252041078480401 Niwari New 25° 20' 40.99" 78° 48' 03.99" D.W - Phreatic/Granite - 10.90 - W.L. & W.Q Manual CGWB

Table 2

HISTORICAL WATER LEVEL (WL) DATA OF MONITORING WELLS

State Madhya Pradesh District Niwari Block Niwari Month of Pre-monsoon Water Level Measurement (May) May M Month of Post-monsoon water Level measurement (November) November

Depth to water level (m.bgl)

Sl. Well No. Well Village Name 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 No Type Pre- Post- Pre- Post- Pre- Post- Pre- Post- Pre- Post- Mon. Mon. Mon. Mon. Mon. Mon. Mon. Mon. Mon. Mon. 1 TKM001-OW D. W Jijora 12.15 11.10 12.50 7.90 12.70 9.00 10.80 6.1 7.90 5.30 2 TKM002-OW D. W Baghat 8.40 7.15 10.30 7.35 10.30 10.15 10.30 5.25 10.30 3.10 3 TKM0004-OW D. W Taricher Kala 10.10 9.90 10.90 10.00 10.90 10.10 10.90 3.85 10.90 3.50 4 TKM005-OW D. W Sendri 10.30 8.70 9.10 8.10 9.70 9.15 9.90 5 9.30 6.90 5 TKM008-OW D. W Teharka 10.10 9.10 6.80 6.30 6.80 6.40 6.80 2.35 6.80 4.10 6 TKM061-OW D. W Ladwari 8.05 6.10 8.05 5.70 7.10 5.65 8.05 2.3 5.85 1.65 7 TKM062-OW D. W Kuluwa 15.10 14.00 14.60 8.90 14.60 14.60 14.60 8.35 14.60 14.60 8 TKM063A-OW D. W Mudara - - 11.30 10.90 13.00 13.00 13.00 7.60 11.55 6.20 9 TKM064-OW D. W Urdora 5.90 4.60 5.20 4.20 5.20 4.50 5.20 4 5.20 1.60 10 TKM065-OW D. W Chakarpur 8.10 7.50 8.60 5.0 7.80 5.50 6.50 3.4 5.1 2.80 11 TKM066A-OW D. W Puchhi karguwa - - 11.30 10.90 11.80 10.05 11.25 2.3 7.65 1.65 12 TKM067-OW D. W Shakti Bhauro 8.40 7.10 8.15 5.55 8.20 5.70 7.30 5.45 7.75 5.50 13 TKM075-OW D. W Gurh Kudar 11.60 9.90 12.05 11.45 13.05 12.50 13.05 7.7 11.65 9.65 14 TKM003-OW D. W Orcha 16.40 10.3 10.9 7.9 10.50 7.00 10.20 4.05 7.95 5.75 15 TKM007-OW D. W Niwari 12.9 10.35 11.9 11.5 11.90 11.65 11.90 4.25 11.90 3.55 16 Tikm002-PZ B.W Mudara 18.05 18.70 20.40 13.90 19.10 17.90 21.80 10.10 13.05 7.20 17 Tikm003-PZ B.W Ubora 13.9 10.9 13.7 11.3 13.0 12.2 15.0 5.5 10.9 5.0 18 Tikm001-PZ B.W Orchha 11.40 10.25 12.90 8.70 11.20 11.00 14.70 4.65 9.65 5.90 19 Tikm005-PZ B.W Niwari 11.80 10.20 16.20 12.10 16.00 15.00 16.80 3.90 7.30 2.80 20 W252045078480001 B.W. Niwari (D) 11.32 12.22 11.54 12.18 17.40 16.76 22.70 4.65 7.05 2.85 21 W252041078480401 D.W Niwari New 10.05 9.94 9.99 10.45 10.44 9.90 10.45 4.95 9.25 2.90

Note: Well Type: DW (Dug well); BW (Bore well - hard rock); TW (Tube well - soft rock); PZ (Piezometer)

Table 3 HISTORICAL WATER QUALITY (WQ) DATA OF MONITORING WELLS (PRE MONSOON)

State Madhya Pradesh District Niwari Block Niwari Month of Collection of sample for WQ monitoring* May

Sl. Well Temp Constituent in mg/l Well No. Village Name Year EC pH No Type (℃)

3 3

SO4 HCo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 2015 - 555 8.0 70.8 18.7 66 1.8 208.0 99 57 - - 2016 - 555 8.1 70.0 21.4 67 3.0 231.2 96 58 - - 1 TKM001-OW D. W. Jijora 2017 - 544 8.0 68.8 22.6 58 2.5 214.9 102 54 - - 2018 - 535 7.9 75.2 11.4 56 2.4 182.6 101 52 - - 2019 - 542 7.9 77.6 12.4 56 3.1 186.6 107 51 - - 2015 ------2016 - 584 8.2 93.6 22.6 62 3.0 303.4 98 51 - - 2 TKM002-OW D. W. Baghat 2017 - 594 8.2 88.8 21.9 68 3.2 263.0 128 53 - - 2018 - 594 8.1 84.4 25.0 63 3.1 257.4 114 51 - - 2019 - 604 8.1 84.8 25.8 62 3.1 257.4 111 52 - - 2015 - 487 8.0 66.4 29.4 45 1.0 267.4 70 40 - - 2016 - 496 8.1 66.4 32.1 54 2.5 283.6 76 40 - -

3 TKM0004-OW D. W. Taricher Kala 2017 - 562 8.0 56.8 26.5 75 3.0 220.9 128 44 - - 2018 - 568 7.9 56.4 26.0 74 3.0 213.4 121 48 - -

578 7.9 59.2 26.2 78 3.1 213.4 121 49 2019 - - - 4 TKM005-OW D. W. Sendri 2015 - 610 8.0 98.0 34.8 50 2.0 366.0 96 51 - - 2016 - 603 8.2 97.2 32.3 56 2.8 363.6 96 50 - - 2017 - 562 8.2 106.8 12.4 63 3.0 295.2 108 52 - - 2018 - 598 8.1 107.2 8.0 59 2.8 238.1 101 52 - - 2019 - 596 8.0 110.8 9.0 61 3.1 261.5 101 54 - - 2015 - 580 8.0 85.2 26.2 60 2.0 275.4 106 56 - - 2016 - 578 8.1 87.2 20.7 62 2.5 282.6 93 55 - - 5 TKM008-OW D. W. Teharka 2017 - 561 8.0 86.0 18.0 61 2.8 248.6 102 58 - - 2018 - 555 7.9 85.2 18.2 54 2.5 219.3 94 53 - - 2019 - 574 7.9 85.6 19.4 56 3.1 232.2 98 53 - - 2015 - 588 8.0 115.2 5.4 56 1.8 285.3 78 49 - - 2016 - 552 8.1 91.2 11.7 60 2.8 229.2 95 49 - - 6 TKM061-OW D. W. Ladwari 2017 - 574 8.0 88.8 10.9 61 3.0 229.8 108 51 - - 2018 - 578 7.9 87.2 11.2 60 2.8 212.4 104 48 - - 2019 - 578 7.9 92.4 8.5 64 3.1 212.4 114 51 ------2015 - - - 578 88.8 29.9 56 2.0 328.1 78 44 2016 - 8.1 - - 596 8.2 84.8 20.2 76 2.6 286.7 119 48 7 TKM062-OW D. W. Kuluwa 2017 - - - 594 8.0 85.6 19.4 72 2.8 285.5 114 51 2018 - - - 616 8.0 81.6 22.8 71 3.1 285.5 114 58 2019 ------2015 - - - 562 44.8 29.7 58 2.0 195.6 89 43 2016 - 8.1 - - - 508 8.0 44.0 22.4 66 3.1 163.4 111 48 - - 8 TKM063A-OW D. W. Mudara 2017 501 8.1 44.8 22.4 64 2.9 160.0 114 48 2018 - - - 516 8.1 42.8 26.2 63 3.1 164.0 115 49 2019 - - - 2015 - 582 8.0 88.0 32.6 48 1.6 332.8 79 46 - - 9 TKM064-OW D. W. Urdora 2016 - 620 8.2 93.6 29.9 67 3.1 307.3 118 58 - - 2017 - 589 8.2 91.6 25.5 66 4.6 307.4 121 54 - - 2018 - 594 8.1 84.0 26.2 70 3.4 281.8 124 51 - - 2019 - 666 8.1 84.8 26.5 69 3.2 285.5 121 55 - - 2015 - 532 8.0 62.0 13.4 53 1.8 186.2 80 55 - - 2016 - 512 8.0 61.6 19.0 55 2.0 175.3 86 56 - - 10 TKM065-OW D. W. Chakarpur 2017 - 493 8.0 60.8 22.1 62 2.8 209.0 101 58 - - 2018 - 588 7.9 66.8 21.6 61 2.4 202.4 115 54 - - 2019 - 588 8.0 66.0 21.9 61 2.8 206.0 104 56 - - 2015 ------2016 - 567 8.1 87.2 17.3 56 2.6 231.2 97 54 - - 11 TKM066A-OW D. W. Puchhikarguwa 2017 - 593 8.0 58.0 31.8 72 3.5 222.9 126 52 - - 2018 - 606 8.0 74.8 27.7 68 3.2 249.6 115 57 - - 2019 - 615 8.0 79.2 28.0 64 3.4 253.6 114 53 - - 2015 ------2016 - 512 8.0 60.4 30.4 50 2.5 253.6 76 36 - - 12 TKM067-OW D. W. Shakti Bhauro 2017 - 534 8.1 74.8 21.1 63 4.1 208.5 118 56 - - 2018 - 587 8.2 77.6 21.9 61 4.0 200.9 114 53 - - 2019 - 589 8.1 80.4 21.4 61 4.2 211.4 114 56 - - 2015 ------2016 - 544 8.1 78.8 22.1 56 2.5 251.0 95 48 - - 13 TKM075-OW D. W. GurhKudar 2017 - 545 8.1 86.4 20.7 58 3.5 232.2 108 61 - - 2018 - 536 8.0 84.4 20.2 58 3.4 240.7 110 59 - - 2019 - 533 8.0 87.6 19.2 58 3.1 241.7 111 56 - - 2015 ------2016 - 652 8.2 106.0 30.1 87 4.0 380.6 118 56 - - 14 TKM003-OW D. W. Orcha 2017 - 616 8.2 101.6 21.4 69 3.4 319.6 118 58 - - 2018 - 624 8.1 96.4 22.8 64 3.4 312.3 104 56 - - 2019 - 623 8.1 96.4 23.6 64 3.5 311.1 114 57 - - 2015 ------2016 - 533 8.1 77.2 11.7 59 2.0 221.3 87 51 - - 15 TKM007-OW D. W. Niwari 2017 - 578 8.0 72.8 12.2 68 2.0 190.2 116 52 - - 2018 - 562 8.0 74.8 8.5 64 2.0 176.3 114 49 - - 2019 - 566 8.0 79.2 8.8 63 2.4 179.3 118 51 - - 2015 ------2016 - 448 8.1 53.2 26.7 61 3.3 163.0 95 62 - - 16 Tikm001-PZ B. W. Orchha 2017 - 543 8.1 53.6 32.3 61 3.4 173.9 107 52 - - 2018 - 542 8.0 53.6 30.9 62 2.9 176.3 95 52 - - 2019 - 555 8.0 53.6 32.3 60 3.1 187.2 101 50 - - 2015 ------2016 - 510 8.1 47.2 25.8 58 3.1 184.8 93 52 - - 17 Tikm002-PZ B. W. Mudara 2017 - 517 8.2 44.8 29.2 66 3.1 186.1 118 48 - - 2018 - 522 7.9 44.8 29.7 56 2.6 187.6 105 48 - - 2019 - 537 7.9 50.8 30.9 58 2.8 193.5 111 52 - - 2015 ------2016 - 531 8.0 66.0 24.8 61 3.6 236.7 96 51 - - 18 Tikm003-PZ B. W. Ubora 2017 - 523 8.1 74.4 17.0 62 3.6 219.3 109 53 - - 2018 - 521 7.9 73.6 17.5 54 3.1 212.4 95 55 - - 2019 - 522 7.9 78.8 21.9 57 3.0 216.3 101 57 - - 2015 ------2016 - 567 8.1 78.0 25.0 68 2.7 240.1 124 64 - - 19 Tikm005-PZ B. W. Niwari 2017 - 567 8.2 76.8 23.1 72 3.6 241.3 121 58 - - 2018 - 574 8.0 78.0 22.8 62 3.0 242.7 111 56 - - 2019 - 576 8.0 80.8 22.8 66 3.2 248.9 121 56 - - 20 W252045078480001 B. W. Niwari (D) 2015 ------2016 ------2017 ------2018 ------2019 ------2015 - 1110 7.63 94 31 85 6.7 275 85 165 43 1.03 2016 - 710 8.15 44 41 46 0.4 160 114 35 56 0.93 21 W252041078480401 D. W. Niwari New 2017 - 890 7.17 59 26 88 0.40 365 65 25 32 1.45 2018 - 700 7.63 31 38 48 8 297 45 8 36 1.34 2019 - 1345 7.19 190 34 41 0 433 149 56 117 0.40

MAP 1- LOCATION MAP OF THE NIWARI BLOCK, NIWARI DISTRICT

MAP 2- HYDROGEOLOGICAL MAP OF THE NIWARI BLOCK, NIWARI DISTRICT

MAP 3- LOCATIONS OF OBSERVATION WELLS FOR MONITORING WATER LEVELS AND WATER QUALITY

MAP 4- SHOWING DISTRIBUTION OF WATER LEVEL (M.BGL.) IN PRE-MONSOON PERIOD (2019)

MAP 5- SHOWING DISTRIBUTION OF WATER LEVEL (M.BGL.) IN POST-MONSOON PERIOD (2019)

MAP 6- SHOWING DISTRIBUTION OF EC (µ S/CM AT 25°C) IN PRE-MONSOON GROUND WATER