Evaluation of Rationalization of  Minor Irrigation Statistics (RMIS) Scheme  

(Funded by Ministry of Water Resources, Minor Irrigation (Statistics) Division, New Delhi)

V. K. Bhatia U. C. Sud D. C. Mathur Hukum Chandra S. B. Lal

Associates Man Singh, S. K. Sharma, D. P. Singh, D. P. Sharma

INDIAN AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ICAR)

LIBRARY AVENUE, NEW DELHI -110012 2010

FOREWORD

Water is a critical input during the crop growth stage. Keeping in view the importance of assured supply of water for agricultural output and food security, many major, medium and minor irrigation schemes were introduced after independence so that an alternate source of irrigation is available to the farmer in the event of deficient rainfall. Due to the introduction of a large number of irrigation schemes, particularly minor irrigation schemes, in the country the area under irrigation has increased significantly. The need for generating accurate statistics on minor irrigation schemes has been felt for a long time. This need arose in order to have correct information on number of schemes and their irrigation potential especially when minor irrigation schemes are being implemented by different departments in the states and at the centre like Agriculture, Rural Development etc. A sound database was needed for effective planning for future. The National Commission on Agriculture after detailed examination of the status of statistics on minor irrigation schemes observed that the statistics on minor irrigation lacks completeness. In view of the importance of statistics on minor irrigation schemes the Commission recommended that a census of minor irrigation schemes be carried out once in five years. Accordingly, the Rationalisation of Minor Irrigation Statistics (RMIS) scheme was sanctioned in 1987-88 to build up a comprehensive and reliable data base on the Minor Irrigation Sector. Under the scheme, each State/UT has identified a nodal department for compilation of minor irrigation statistics and for conduct of census of minor irrigation schemes on five yearly basis. The centre provides 100% assistance to State/UTs under the scheme. Three All India Censuses of Minor Irrigation (MI) schemes have been conducted under RMIS scheme with reference years 1986-87, 1993-94 and 2000-01 so far. The reports relating to three censuses have since been brought out. The 4th MI Census with reference year 2006-07 has been launched in all States/UTs in the country. The data collected through the census is presently under processing in States/UTs. During Eleventh Five Year Plan, the RMIS scheme was converted to Central Sector as one of the components of Development of Water Resources Information System scheme of the Ministry of Water Resources. Recently, the Planning Commission desired that an evaluation of the RMIS scheme be carried out to assess its effectiveness and usefulness. The Minor Irrigation (MI) Statistics (Stat.) Division, Ministry of Water Resources awarded the evaluation study to IASRI with the specific objectives of examining if the objectives of the scheme have been met, the methodology being followed, the infrastructure developed, items of data being collected under the scheme and to suggest improvements, if any. I am glad that the IASRI has carried out this evaluation study in a short span of five months. The present report contains the results of the evaluation study. I hope that the report of the study would be useful to planners and other users.

(U. N. Panjiar) Secretary,

Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi March, 2010

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to place on record their sincere thanks to the Ministry of Water

Resources, New Delhi for awarding this study and providing the funds. The authors

would specifically like to thank Sh. V K Arora, former ADG, Minor Irrigation (Stat.),

Ministry of Water Resources, Govt. of India and Sh. Vijay Kumar ADG, Minor Irrigation

(Stat.), Ministry of Water Resources, Govt. of India for providing support in various

aspects of the study. The authors are grateful to the experts Dr. S K Raheja, former

Director, IASRI, Dr. B.B.P.S. Goel, former Director, IASRI, Dr. A K Srivastava, former

Joint Director, IASRI and Dr. T B S Rajput, Project Director, Water Technology Centre,

IARI for their valuable inputs related to the various activities of the study. The authors

express their gratefulness to Sh. A K Srivastava, former Director, Ministry of Water

Resources, Govt. of India for providing the administrative support necessary during the

initial stages of the study. The authors are thankful to Ms. Mamata Saxena, Dy. Director

General, Minor Irrigation (Stat.), Ministry of Water Resources, Govt. of India for

providing the necessary support in day to day activities of the study.

Authors

CONTENTS

Title

Page No.

FOREWORD ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

CONTENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

5 CHAPTER I

10 INTRODUCTION

10 1.1 Introduction

10 1.2 Minor Irrigation Schemes

10 1.3 Minor Irrigation Data Sources

11 1.4 Genesis of Evaluation Study

12 CHAPTER II

14 RATIONALIZATION OF MINOR IRRIGATION STATISTICS SCHEMES

14 2.1 Introduction 14

2.2 Details of Rationalization of Minor Irrigation Statistics (RMIS) Scheme

14 2.3 Methodology

16 2.4 Selection of Primary Enumerators

17 2.5 Training programme for Data Collection

17 2.6 Procedure for Conducting Census Operation

17 2.7 Computerisation of Census Data

18 2.8 Items of Coverage in Minor Irrigation Census

18 CHAPTER III

22 EVALUATION OF RATIONALIZATION OF MINOR IRRIGATION STATISTICS SCHEME 22 3.1 Introduction

22 3.2 Progress of the Study

22 CHAPTER IV

25

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM HEADQUARTER AND NODAL OFFICERS 25 4.1 Introduction

25 4.2 Summary of Information Reported on Indicator on Data Quality

25 4.3 Summary of Information Reported on Indicator on Constraints 26

4.4 Summary of Information Reported on Indicator on Suggestions for Improvement 32 CHAPTER V

39 SUMMARY OF INFORMATION OBTAINED AT DISTRICT LEVEL

39 5.1 Introduction

39 5.2 Details of Information Obtained at District Level

39 CHAPTER VI

44 SUMMARY OF INFORMATION OBTAINED THROUGH FIELD VISITS

44 6.1 Introduction

44 6.2 Details of Information Obtained Through Field Visits

44 ANNEXURE I

50 Questionnaire for Collection of Information from MoWR

50

Questionnaire for Collection of Information from State 58

Questionnaire for Collection of Information from District 62

Questionnaire for Collection of Information from Village 64

ANNEXURE II 66

FOURTH CENSUS OF MINOR IRRIGATION SCHEMES 66

ANNEXURE III 76

SUGGESTED REVISIONS IN THE FOURTH CENSUS OF MINOR IRRIGATION SCHEMES 76

1

RECOMMENDATIONS

Useful data on Minor Irrigation are being collected under RMIS scheme. Four censuses have

been conducted so far. Improvements have taken place in coverage, methodology of data

collection, data processing etc. The statistics generated under the scheme are being used by

various departments in the Government. However, there is scope for further improvement in

the data quality, methodology of data collection, timeliness of collecting and analysis of data

and release of MI statistics to the users. To fully meet the objectives with which the scheme

started, appropriate steps need to be taken to improve data quality so that a sound database on

statistics of Minor Irrigation is available in a timely manner.

Strengthening of infrastructure developed under the RMIS scheme

• The infrastructure available under the RMIS scheme is not adequate and needs to be

strengthened. There is shortage of manpower and accommodation, lack of adequate data

processing facility, lack of transport etc.

• There is lack of effective communication between various state nodal officers and

officials in the Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR). In the absence of such facilities

the data quality and its timely release is adversely affected. Corrective measures in terms

of more accommodation, computational facilities etc. both at the Centre and State level

are recommended to improve the infra structure under the RMIS scheme.

Improvement in data quality

• There is a scope for improvement in the training provided to the primary workers. In

addition to class-room lectures, the training be made more practical oriented by actual

collection of data in some villages. Instructions in the schedules be explained with the

help of suitable examples.

• There is a need for modifications in Schedules. Difficulty was reported in collection of

data on items like cost of construction of the scheme, measuring of water level, depth of

well, volume of ponds, Irrigation Potential Created/Utilized etc. These aspects need to be

looked into. (Details provided in ANNEXURE-III).

• The schedules and instructions manual need to be made bilingual (English and local

language).

• Supervision of the work of primary workers should start from the initial stage of field

work. This will help in identifying and rectifying mistakes committed by the enumerators

2

so that the same are not repeated later on. A supervisor’s manual including a proforma for

inspection reports need to be devised to make the supervision work more effective.

Necessary provisions should be made for training of the trainers. Besides, supervision of

the MI census work should be entrusted to only trained supervisors. The completeness of

the data in terms of number of farmers, villages and schemes need to be checked and

verified by the supervisor at every stage. In case data on some farmers/villages are

missing, the number not covered should be reported for each district.

• The census of Minor Irrigation be given due publicity in the local areas so as to create

awareness among the farmers about its importance. This will help in enlisting the co-

operation from the farmers at the time of data collection.

• Wherever there is difficulty in getting village records i.e. Khasra register, necessary

directive be issued from the nodal officers to the revenue departments in the States to

make available such records to the enumerators.

Improvement in the methodology

• A permanent record of schemes covered in the 4th census be maintained by the village

level officials by assigning specific codes. This should serve as a base for the next

census. During the time of next census the available database should be updated. For non-

functional schemes provisions be made in the existing Schedules for recording the date

from which a scheme became functional along with date from which it became non-

functional.

• There are some States like Assam and Meghalaya where Khasra registers are not being

maintained. For such States necessary provisions may be made in the Schedules for

recording identification particulars like location of the scheme.

• Currently three schedules have been designed for collection of MI census data. An

additional schedule needs to be designed for data collection on irrigation schemes

extending over more than one villages. Data collection in this Schedule be done by

supervisory staff with the help of irrigation department officials.

• Concepts and definitions need to be more precise. Items like calculation of Irrigation

Potential Created (IPC) are not clearly explained. This creates confusion about working

out the Irrigation Potential Created and recording reliable data. Clear cut guidelines for

working out IPC be laid down. The MI staff should be involved in collection of data on

this item.

3

Timeliness of data

• The budget sanctioned under RMIS scheme needs to be released to the states in time.

This will help in timely implementation and completion of assigned work of RMIS

scheme.

• Nodal officers should ensure that the data collection work commences in time as per the

census reference period. This will ensure that data collection proceeds in a timely

manner.

• There is a need to strengthen the existing networking and communication system between

the nodal officers and district level officials. This will go a long way in regular flow of

data at various levels and timely processing of data and release of results of the census.

Further, measures like in-depth analysis of data, comparison of similar items of data

collected over space and time (from other sources and inter-censal comparisons etc.) are

required.

Improvement in the working of the RMIS scheme

• The staff posted at the MI (Stat) Division in the Headquarter is inadequate. All the

sanctioned posts in the Division be filled up on a priority basis. Additional positions like

Senior Technical Assistant with statistics background be sanctioned urgently. Similarly,

steps be taken immediately to fill the vacant positions in the MI cells in the States. Due to

vacant positions, the statistical cells are unable to organize special surveys and pilot

studies as part of their routine activities.

• Data processing facilities and networking system of RMIS scheme for regular flow of

data/information at various levels and timely analysis of data need to be strengthened. It

is important to provide latest versions of computers and other related equipments to the

statistical cells in different states.

• A software for data entry has been developed by the National Informatics Center. Some

of the States have reported problems in the use of this software. An improved software

needs to be developed for data entry. The National Informatics Center may be

approached for this purpose.

• There should be clear cut guidelines from the Nodal officers to the concerned State

departments that the primary workers involved in the census work should not be diverted

to other work during the period of census work.

4

• The honorarium currently being paid to the primary workers and officials at flat rate for

census work is inadequate and needs to be reviewed depending upon the area covered and

quantity of work. This will provide necessary motivation to them for efficient execution

of MI census work.

• For computerization of the census data, unique codes for each Revenue Village and each

MI scheme should be generated to access the database. Presently it is done on the basis of

State, District and Block Codes.

• Concerted efforts should be made by the Nodal officers implementing minor irrigation

schemes, with the help of village officials, for formation of Water Users Associations

under minor irrigation scheme. These bodies may be asked to maintain information about

the potential created and potential utilized in the respective minor irrigation schemes

under the guidance of village officials.

• It is seen at present that there is no interpretation given for the data presented in the tables

in census report. It will be useful to give interpretation of the data for the benefit of users.

• The MI (Stat.) Division in the Ministry of Water Resources should provide appropriate

methodology for organizing special surveys in between two census for estimating yard-

sticks of additional area irrigated for different categories of Minor Irrigation projects with

break up for food and non food crops and for organizing pilot studies to ascertain the

increase in productivity due to minor irrigation projects. This may need some expertise in

planning of sample surveys and dealing with methodological issues like sampling design,

sample size determination, designing questionnaires etc. To deal with such issues, expert

assistance from outside the Ministry may be needed. Even after these issues are tackled at

the official level the implementation in the field need to be monitored by experienced and

qualified staff.

• Census of Minor Irrigation is basically a statistical operation. State Statistical

Directorates, particularly officials dealing with Agricultural Statistics in such

Directorates, may be associated in the MI census programme so that the statistical aspects

of the census are not lost sight of and the quality of data remain under control.

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Agriculture in many parts of India is largely rainfed. This excessive dependence on rainfall

may adversely affect crop production in case the rainfall is deficient. It is therefore

imperative to fully exploit the ground and surface water potential for irrigation purpose so

that over dependence on rainfall can be reduced and remedial measures put in place in the

event of deficient or failure of rainfall. In view of the importance of assured supply of water

for agricultural output and food security, many major, medium and minor irrigation schemes

were introduced after independence so that an alternate source of irrigation is available to the

farmer in the event of deficient rainfall. Due to the introduction of a large number of

irrigation schemes, particularly minor irrigation schemes in the country, the area under

irrigation has increased significantly.

The need for generating accurate statistics of minor irrigation has been felt for a long time

due to the following reasons:

• For providing reliable information on number of schemes in operation and their

irrigation potential

• Many old schemes fall into disuse with time

• The irrigation potential created and utilized through ground water schemes as well as

some surface water schemes are not recorded systematically in many cases as these

are implemented and monitored by individual farmers

• Minor irrigation projects including those projects, which were built by Government

departments, need periodical review for appropriate future action

• A sound database is needed for effective planning for future.

Due to problems in generation of accurate statistics on minor irrigation, the National

Commission on Agriculture recommended that the statistics on Minor Irrigation be collected

through a quinquennial census. Accordingly, a scheme entitled Rationalisation of Minor

Irrigation Statistics (RMIS) Scheme was introduced, the first Census of Minor Irrigation

Projects was introduced in all the States/ UTs with reference year 1986-87. The 4th MI

Census with reference year 2006-07 has been launched in all States/UTs in the country.

During Eleventh Five Year Plan, the RMIS Scheme was brought under Central Sector as one

of the components of Development of Water Resources Information System scheme of the

6

Ministry of Water Resources. In this context, the Planning Commission felt the need for

carrying out an evaluation of the RMIS scheme to assess its effectiveness and usefulness. The

Minor Irrigation (MI) Statistics (Stat.) Division, Ministry of Water Resources awarded the

evaluation study to IASRI with a view to determine whether the objectives of the scheme

have been met, examining the methodology, the infra structure developed, items of data being

collected under the scheme etc. and to suggest improvements, if any.

Accordingly, a study of four months duration was planned by IASRI with 25th July, 2009 as

the date of commencement. A team comprising scientists and technical persons was

constituted to undertake various components of evaluation study. A team of four outside

experts namely, Dr S K Raheja, Former Director, IASRI, Dr B B P S Goel, Former Director,

IASRI, Dr A K Srivastava, Former Joint Director, IASRI and Dr T B S Rajput, Project

Director, Water Technology Centre, IARI was constituted for providing technical guidance.

The evaluation study has been carried out as per the Terms of Reference outlined in the

Memorandum of Understanding. Accordingly, the objectives of the RMIS scheme were

examined. The methodology being followed in the scheme was studied and suggestions for

improvements were made. The items of data being collected in the scheme were examined

and an assessment of data quality was made. Further, the infrastructure developed under the

scheme was studied and suitable suggestions were made for improvements in the

infrastructure. Completeness of data in terms of farmers covered and total number of farmers

in a village or villages covered vis-à-vis total villages in a district could not be checked

because of shortage of time.

To critically examine the infrastructure developed under the scheme thorough review of the

available literature was made and detailed discussions were organized with the experts to

understand the working of the RMIS scheme and to critically examine the methodology being

followed for census work. The existing schedules meant for collecting census data and the

instructions manual were carefully studied to understand the items on which data was being

collected. The evaluation of the RMIS scheme was carried out on the basis of field visits and

by collecting information from the officials of MI (Stat.) Division, MoWR and officials

involved at different levels in RMIS. For collecting information from various officials four

different questionnaires were designed for collection of information from the officials

working at different levels under the RMIS scheme. These were: questionnaire for collecting

information from the headquarter, questionnaire for collecting information from the State

officials. Both these questionnaires covered census as well as quarterly progress reports

7

received from the concerned State departments as a source for collecting information on MI

for the purpose of evaluation. The third questionnaire was designed for collecting information

from the district officials and the fourth questionnaire for collecting information from the

primary worker/enumerator. The primary objective in designing the questionnaires was to

collect information on the available infra structure under the RMIS scheme, to understand the

mechanism of data collection and flow of data at various levels, collection of information

through Quarterly Progress Reports (QPRs) and problems being faced in data collection,

assessing the quality of data and to make an assessment of how far the objectives of RMIS

scheme have been met.

Questionnaires I, II and III were sent to the Minor Irrigation Statistics Division of MoWR,

concerned officials in the state and some of the districts in the selected states. The

questionnaires meant for the village level workers were to be filled up during field visits by

the officials of the IASRI.

A summary of salient information obtained at various levels is presented below:

• The officials from the Ministry of Water Resources were of the view that the

Quarterly Progress Reports be submitted online. Necessary guidelines regarding

submission of QPR data to be explained and clarified through regular regional

meetings. On the infrastructure side, the available accommodation was reported to be

grossly inadequate and there was a demand for adequate accommodation, computing

facilities etc. essential for the staff. The officials reported that the vacant post of

Senior Evaluation Officer needs to be filled up urgently. One additional post of Senior

Technical Assistant with statistics background was considered necessary and needs to

be created and filled up on regular basis. Also, Census work at field level should be

given more publicity to create awareness among the farmers about the census.

• The response from the designated nodal officers was mainly in terms of strengthening

infrastructure viz. adequate transport, more computers, additional manpower, non-

diversion of primary workers for other work and timely release of sanctioned funds

from the Ministry. Further, many of the designated nodal officers informed that in the

absence of any guidelines and due to vacant positions it was not possible to conduct

special surveys/pilot studies. On the basis of responses obtained from MI (Stat.)

Division and Nodal officers of the States it is very clear that the infrastructure

available under the RMIS scheme is not adequate and needs to be strengthened. There

8

is shortage of manpower and accommodation, lack of adequate data processing

facilities, lack of transport for conduct of field work. There is lack of effective

communication between state nodal officers and other officials. In the absence of

these facilities the statistical cells are unable to perform some of the assigned

activities. Besides, data quality and timely release of results is adversely affected.

Corrective measures are urgently needed to improve the infra structure as well as data

quality under the RMIS scheme.

• The responses from the district level officials were mainly in terms of difficulties

faced in data collection due to non-availability or non co-operation of farmers,

difficulty in accessing the village records i.e. Khasra Register, definitions not being

clear, non-availability of instructions manual in local language, inadequate

honorarium fixed for carrying out the census work, lack of computer facilities for data

entry work at the district level. In view of the constraints reported at the district level

it was felt necessary that the nodal officers should ensure that the enumerators are

able to access village records.

• The field visits by the IASRI officials revealed that the primary workers were facing

difficulty in collecting information on items like cost of construction and maintenance

of the MI scheme, diameter of well, depth of water level, distance from nearest well,

confusion in calculating Irrigation Potential Created (IPC) etc. on account of lack of

clear instructions. It was found that the schedules were not properly checked by the

supervisory officers, there were mistakes in data recorded in the schedules. To avoid

such problems, it was felt that a supervisor’s manual including a proforma for

inspection reports need to be devised, training be provided to trainers and supervision

work should begin right at the start of data collection work so that the same mistakes

are not repeated later on. Further, the instructions manual was neither practical

oriented nor self explanatory and also needed to be supplemented by field training in

the villages. The primary workers felt that apart from class room lectures, the training

for data collection be practically oriented and be imparted in the villages to the extent

possible. The items in the Schedules be explained with the help of examples. The

Schedules and Instructions manual be made bilingual (English and local language).

To streamline the work of data collection and reduce the work load of data collection it was

felt that a permanent record of schemes covered in the 4th census be maintained by the village

level officials. This should serve as a base for the next census. During the time of next census

9

the available database should be updated. There are some States like Assam and Meghalaya

where khasara registers are not being maintained. For such States necessary provisions may

be made in the Schedules for recording identification particulars like location of the scheme.

Currently, three schedules have been designed for collection of MI census data. An additional

schedule needs to be designed for data collection on MI schemes covering several villages.

Data collection in this Schedule be the responsibility of higher level officials preferably from

MI department. Such schemes should be removed from the village schedules. Further,

concepts and definitions need to be more precise. Measures like revisions in the existing

schedules, strengthening of data processing, networking system and infra structure, practical

oriented training of enumerators and supervisors as well as effective supervision of the work

of primary workers, filling up of vacant posts and immediate sanction of additional posts,

creating awareness among the farmers about the census, rationalization of basis of fixation of

honorarium, development of an efficient software and timely release of available funds are

needed for improving data quality and timely release of census results. The role of Nodal

officers is critical for achieving the objectives of the scheme.

10

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

A large population in India is dependent on Agriculture. But agriculture in many parts of the

country is rainfed. This excessive dependence on rainfall may adversely affect crop

production in case the rainfall is deficient. It is therefore imperative to fully exploit the

ground and surface water potential for irrigation purpose so that over dependence on rainfall

can be avoided and remedial measures put in place in the event of failure of rainfall. In view

of the importance of assured supply of water for agricultural output and food security, many

major, medium and minor irrigation schemes were introduced after independence so that an

alternate source of irrigation is available to the farmer in the event of deficient rainfall. Due

to the introduction of a large number of irrigation schemes in the country the area under

irrigation has increased significantly.

Small holding sizes are typical characteristics of Indian agriculture. Majority of the farmers

have very low income as only a small piece of land is available to them for cultivation. In this

context, the minor irrigation schemes in the country are especially important to the farmers

belonging to this category. These schemes provide the farmers with controlled and timely

irrigation which the new high yielding varieties of crops demand. Such schemes are labour

intensive, need less time for completion and require low investments for their commissioning.

Therefore various development programmes in the States/Union Territories (UTs) are aimed

at creating innumerable number of new minor irrigation schemes.

1.2 Minor Irrigation Schemes

All ground water schemes and surface water schemes (both flow and lift) having Culturable

Command Area up to 2000 ha. individually are classified as Minor Irrigation Schemes.

Ground water schemes comprise dug wells, dug-cum-bore wells, borings, private shallow

tubewells, filter points and deep tubewells. The command area of private ground water

schemes varies from 1 to 5 hectares. The State Governments assistance in installation of such

schemes is confined mainly to providing technical guidance, custom service for boring and

arrangements for credit facilities at reasonable rates of interest. Subsidies are also made

available for installation of these schemes to weaker sections of farmers. Ground water

development is largely done through individual and cooperative efforts of the farmers. The

11

construction, operation and maintenance of these schemes are done by the farmers

themselves. Shallow tubewells have depth upto 70 metres and are capable of discharging 300

cubic metres of water per day. Deep tubewells which extend up to the depth of 200 metres or

more are designed to give a discharge of 100 to 200 cubic metres per hour.

The surface water schemes comprise surface flow schemes and surface lift irrigation

schemes. The surface flow schemes typically consist of tanks, check dams and structures and

can serve as water conservation cum ground water recharge schemes. The structures are

generally prevalent in hilly regions. These are known as Kuhl in Jammu & Kashmir and

Himachal Pradesh, Gul in Uttar Pradesh, Ahars and Pynes in Bihar and low Khones and

Dongs in north-eastern region. The small storage tanks are owned by community or local

bodies and generally have command area up to 40 hectares. The large storage tanks along

with the distribution system having command area varying from 40 to 2000 hectares are

constructed by State Government Departments.

1.3 Minor Irrigation Data Sources

The need for generating accurate statistics on minor irrigation has been felt for a long time

due to many reasons. This need arose in order to have correct information on number of

schemes and their irrigation potential. With time, many old schemes fall into disuse. Thus the

irrigation potential created and utilized through ground water schemes as well as some

surface water schemes are not recorded systematically in many cases as these are

implemented and monitored by individual farmers. Minor irrigation projects including those

projects, which were built by Government departments, need periodical review for

appropriate future action. A sound database is needed for effective planning for future.

The main sources of Minor Irrigation Statistics data are (i) Land Use Statistics (LUS) of

Ministry of Agriculture, (ii) Periodical Progress Reports from State Government

Departments, (iii) Annual Administrative Reports compiled by the State Government

Departments and (iv) Ad hoc reports prepared by various agencies from time to time on the

basis of sample survey to access the performance of minor irrigation works.

The LUS are collected by the patwaris on the basis of complete enumeration in temporarily

settled States while in permanently settled States the statistics are collected on the basis of

sample surveys. The irrigation statistics are compiled as ancillary byproduct of LUS. But the

forms meant for collecting LUS vary from state to state and information on relevant items

under irrigation is neither comparable nor complete. More often than not it is not possible to

12

collect head wise data on some of the important minor irrigation schemes like private

tubewells, dugwells, deep tubewells, diversion schemes and surface lift irrigation schemes.

Further, the Patwaris, the main agency responsible for collection of data on minor irrigation,

in the States are involved in multifarious activities. They are thus not able to devote sufficient

time on collection of data on minor irrigation. The net result of these various factors is that

the quality of statistics on minor irrigation as generated through LUS is not upto desired

standard in some cases.

The minor irrigation schemes in the states are handled by different departments. The progress

reports of the various departments are used by the Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR) for

compilation of minor irrigation statistics. But at the state level there is no single nodal

department compiling the minor irrigation statistics for the entire state. In view of the

multiplicity of agencies involved in development of minor irrigation programme in the States

and lack of coordination among the agencies, some of the information on minor irrigation

statistics is likely to be missed. It is also noticed that sometimes the state figures are based on

subjective judgement. The annual administrative reports of the departments also do not

provide complete picture. Thus the information compiled on MI schemes from

progress/administrative reports lack completeness.

The ad-hoc surveys conducted in the states are another source of statistics on minor

irrigation. But the statistics generated through such surveys are not very reliable.

1.4 Genesis of Evaluation Study

In view of problems in generation of accurate statistics on minor irrigation, the National

Commission on Agriculture recommended that the statistics on Minor Irrigation be collected

through a census to be conducted quinquennially. Accordingly, a scheme entitled

Rationalisation of Minor Irrigation Statistics (RMIS) was formulated. The first Census of

Minor Irrigation Projects was conducted in all the States/ UTs with reference year 1986-87.

The 4th MI Census with reference year 2006-07 has been launched in all States/UTs in the

country.

During Eleventh Five Year Plan, the RMIS scheme was brought under Central Sector as one

of the components of Development of Water Resources Information System scheme of the

Ministry of Water Resources. The Planning Commission desires that an evaluation of the

RMIS scheme be carried out to assess its effectiveness and usefulness. The Minor Irrigation

13

(MI) Statistics (Stat.) Division, Ministry of Water Resources awarded the evaluation study to

IASRI with the following objectives:

1. To examine if the objectives of the scheme have been met

2. To critically examine the methodology being followed in the scheme

3. To critically examine the items of data being collected in the scheme and to make an

assessment of data quality

4. To critically examine the infrastructure developed under the scheme

5. To suggest improvement, if any

14

CHAPTER II

RATIONALIZATION OF MINOR IRRIGATION STATISTICS

SCHEMES

2.1 Introduction

The National Commission on Agriculture after detailed examination of the status of statistics

on minor irrigation observed that the statistics on minor irrigation lacks completeness. In

view of the importance of statistics on minor irrigation the Commission recommended that a

census of minor irrigation schemes be carried out once in five years. The commission also

recommended that the census on minor irrigation be carried out as part of Agricultural

census.

A detailed census of minor irrigation schemes was first recommended by a sub-committee on

irrigation statistics set up by the Planning Commission in 1970. The Technical Committee on

Agricultural Census 1980-81 examined in detail the list of items of minor irrigation on which

data are required under the census. It was realized that the agricultural census data are

compiled from the existing land records and many of the items of minor irrigation on which

data are required do not figure in the existing land records. Thus it was not possible to

conduct census of minor irrigation as part of agricultural census.

The scheme of Improvement of Irrigation Statistics was launched in 1980-81 by the

Department of Agriculture. Although census of minor irrigation work was to be taken up

under this scheme, it could not be conducted till 1985-86. While discussing various issues

and problems in the irrigation sector in the Planning Commission in 1986, it was stressed that

census of minor irrigation schemes be conducted quinquennially. The first census of Minor

Irrigation was conducted under Rationalisation of Minor Irrigation Statistics (RMIS) scheme.

2.2 Details of Rationalization of Minor Irrigation Statistics (RMIS) Scheme

The RMIS scheme was sanctioned in 1987-88 to build up a comprehensive and reliable data

base in the Minor Irrigation Sector. It is fully centrally sponsored plan scheme. The major

components of the scheme are:

1. Creation and maintenance of Statistical Cells in the States

2. Organise and coordinate collection and compilation of statistics relating to Minor

Irrigation Projects and their regular reporting on annual basis

15

3. Organise and conduct Census of Minor Irrigation projects on quinquennial basis.

The main objectives of the scheme are:

i) To take up studies regarding reconciliation of discrepancies in figures of area

irrigated as reported in agricultural statistics and in periodical progress reports

received from the State Governments.

ii) To coordinate statistics relating to Minor Irrigation projects on a quarterly and on

an annual basis.

iii) To organise special surveys in between two census for estimating yard-sticks of

additional area irrigated for different categories of Minor Irrigation projects with

break up for food and non food corps.

iv) To ascertain reasons for the disuse of projects through special surveys as also the

rate of depreciation due to siltation of surface water storage projects.

v) To organize on a quinquennial basis, a census of minor irrigation projects.

vi) To compile statistics of area irrigated under crops according to seasons.

vii) To explore the possibility of organising pilot studies to ascertain the increase in

productivity due to minor irrigation projects.

viii) To collect information regarding the extent of construction of minor irrigation

works through Institutional finance and through own private finance of farmers as

a part of the quinquennial census of minor irrigation projects.

Three hundred twelve posts are sanctioned under the scheme and Statistical Cells have been

created for MI statistics in the nodal department of States/UTs. In each of the States/UTs

nodal officers are designated. The statistical cells created in the states work under the overall

guidance of nodal officers. Funds for salary and allowances of the statistical cells in the

States and for honorarium contingencies and processing of data of MI Census are released by

MI (Stat.) Division every year.

The statistical cells in various States and UTs collect information on number of MI schemes,

potential created and potential utilized from different departments and send the collected

information to MI (Stat.) Division in the Ministry of Water Resources on Quarterly basis.

State wise potential created and utilized data are compiled by the MI (Stat.) Division on

yearly basis based on quarterly progress reports of States.

An important activity of the cells is to conduct census of minor irrigation on quinquennial

basis. Sample surveys on MI schemes which fell into disuse between two census periods are

16

also carried out by the cells. The census of Minor Irrigation is carried out under the overall

guidance and supervision of the nodal officers who are designated as Minor Irrigation Census

Commissioners. Minor Irrigation Census aims at collection of basic information on all minor

irrigation schemes operating in the country namely: Dug wells, Shallow tube wells, Deep

Tube wells, Surface Flow and Surface Lift schemes. The census provides detailed

information giving State wise/District wise number of schemes, No. of schemes in use and

not in use, Culturable Command Area, Potential created, Potential utilized, etc. in respect of

each type of MI schemes. MI Census data is processed at all India level and report is prepared

by MI (Stat.) Division.

2.3 Methodology

The MI Census data are collected in six different enumeration schedules. (The six schedules

have now been modified into 3 schedules). One of the schedules is the village schedule in

which data are collected by inquiry from patwaries/ village level workers/ gram pradhans

etc., and the information from revenue or land records maintained in the government records.

The other five schedules are canvassed by enumerators by inquiry from the owners of the

schemes. These five schedules cover five different types of minor irrigation schemes (these

five schedules have now been modified into two schedules, one covering ground water

schemes and the other covering surface water schemes). The fieldwork of the census is either

undertaken by the nodal department itself or entrusted to some other agency which the

State/UT government considers fit keeping in view infrastructure available with them.

However, for the entire census operation, Minor Irrigation Census Commissioner is the key

official. The primary work of collection of data is carried out by the enumerators, who are

village level workers or village accountants or Lekhpals or Patwaries or a combination of

these as the case may be. The work of supervision is entrusted to the next superior officer of

the field agency by the State/UT; they are Block Level Officers or Sub-Divisional Officers.

In order to increase the reliability of data, sample checks are conducted before finalization.

Systematic sampling technique is adopted for 5 percent sample check at the district level. As

such, one out of every 20 villages is selected for sample check by the concerned supervisory

officer. The procedure for identifying the village for supervision is also specified in the

guidelines.

17

2.4 Selection of Primary Enumerators

The nodal departments of States/UTs are vested with the responsibility of selecting a

particular agency as primary enumerator. It could be the Village Level Worker / Patwari /

Panchayat Inspector / any other agency suitable in a particular region. In selecting such

agencies as enumerators, the nodal departments are required to ascertain that they would have

appropriate association with the farmers. The information required in the primary schedules

is obtained by inquiry from the farmers and physical verification/observation by the

enumerators in respect of a particular scheme.

2.5 Training Programme for Data Collection

Training programmes cum workshops are organised by the Minor Irrigation Census

Commissioners at the State Headquarters in which the District Level Officers participate. A

representative from the Centre also participates as an Observer in these workshops. The

details of the methodology adopted for the census, its procedure, concepts and definitions are

discussed thoroughly and necessary clarifications are given. The instructions for filling up

the primary enumeration schedules are also discussed during the workshops. The District

Level Officers in turn organise training programmes at district headquarters in which the

primary enumerators participate. The instructions for filling up the primary enumeration

schedules are explained thoroughly in such training programmes.

2.6 Procedure for Conducting Census Operation

The primary enumerators while canvassing the schedules visit the owner of the minor

irrigation scheme or its neighbour in case of absence of the owner and collect information on

the basis of personal enquiry from him. The purpose of the census is explained to the farmer

to win over his confidence in giving the specific information in respect of minor irrigation

works. Information relating to the scheme is collected by the enumerators by physical

examination of the scheme also.

After filling up the schedules, the enumerators are required to submit all completed schedules

to the Block Development Officer/Officer in-charge at the block level. The block level

officers submit all the schedules to the district level officer concerned who after getting the

data computerized pass on the floppy/CD containing data as well as the schedules, to the

Minor Irrigation Census Commissioner of the State/UT.

18

2.7 Computerisation of Census Data

The work of computerization of Census data is taken up by the National Informatics Centre

(NIC). For computerization of census data, a software has been developed by National

Informatics Centre (NIC) which is provided to the State Minor Irrigation Census

Commissioners. In some States, private consultants/agencies are hired by the Minor Irrigation

Census Commissioners to computerise the data from primary enumeration schedules,

according to software provided by NIC. This work is taken up at the district headquarters to

facilitate data handling and also to minimise delays in computerization work. Data collected

is entered in computer media after duly ascertaining the correctness and is passed on to the

Minor Irrigation Census Commissioner at the state level. A copy of the data file is sent to the

centre by the State Minor Irrigation Census Commissioners. At the State headquarters, State

Minor Irrigation Census Report is brought out for which uniform tabulation plan is finalised

by the Statistical Cell in MoWR. The census data received from the States at the Central

Statistical Cell is utilised for compiling National Level Minor Irrigation Census Report.

First Minor Irrigation Census

The first Census of Minor Irrigation Projects was conducted in the States/ UTs with reference

year 1986-87 and the All India Census Report was published in November 1993.

Second Minor Irrigation Census

The Second MI Census with reference year 1993-94 was launched in September, 1994 in 25

States and 4 UTs. The Second Census Report was published in March 2001.

Third Minor Irrigation Census

The 3rd MI Census with reference year 2000-01 was launched in 2000 in 33 States/UTs. All

India report has been released in November 2005.

Fourth Minor Irrigation Census

The 4th MI Census with reference year 2006-07 was launched in all States/UTs in the

country in 2007. The All India Training Workshops for the State Government officials

were conducted in February 2007. The States have collected the field data during 2007-

08 and are engaged in data processing at present.

2.8 Items of Coverage in Minor Irrigation Census

Information on the following items are collected under the census:

19

Type of schemes:

Dug well, Shallow Tube well, Deep Tube Well

Surface Flow (Tank, other storage, Permanent diversion, Temporary diversion, Water

conservation)

Surface Lift (on river, stream, drain/canal, tank/pond)

1. Location of the scheme (Identification particulars)

2. Ownership of the Scheme

3. Social Status of the owner (privately owned schemes)

4. Holding size of the owner

5. Year of commissioning of the scheme.

6. Lifting device of the scheme, if any

7. Water distribution device of the scheme

8. Source of finance

9. Cost of commissioning and maintenance of the scheme*

10. Current status (in use/not in use) of the scheme

11. If not in use, the reason for ‘not in use’

12. If under utilized, the reasons for under utilization

13. Culturable command area of the scheme

14. Irrigation Potential Created through scheme

15. Season wise Irrigation Potential Utilized through the scheme

16. Supplementary status of the scheme

*this item is being introduced in 4th MI Census (ref year 2006-07)

During Eleventh Five Year Plan, the RMIS scheme was converted to Central Sector as one of

the components of Development of Water Resources Information System Scheme of the

Ministry of Water Resources. The present study aims at an evaluation of the RMIS scheme to

assess the effectiveness and usefulness of the scheme. The terms of reference of evaluation

are as follows:

20

Coverage

The study will involve a critical examination of the methodology and items of data collected

in the States/UTs. A minimum of two MI schemes in at least one district selected from 10

States of the country, in East, West, North, South, Central and North-East zones would be

visited and the data collected for examining the reliability of information. It will be ensured

that all five types of minor irrigation schemes are covered in the study.

Methodology

The evaluation study will be coordinated and conducted by the agency appointed for this

purpose (under the overall supervision of MoWR). The agency will be responsible for

planning, training of field personnel, checking quality of data, analysis and feedback.

The agency will have discussions with the State Nodal Officers, carry out field visits and

organize data collection for testing. The agency will organize monthly workshops in which

officials from the Ministry and the States will participate with a view to have periodic

assessment of the evaluation study.

Responsibilities

Ministry of Water Resources would supply technical guidelines and schedules of the RMIS

scheme and the past data for sample units, if required, by the agency. It will provide

assistance to the agency in their field visits and would help in the coordination with

States/UTs.

The agency will plan their programme of work and methodology of assessment and carry out

necessary field surveys. They will bring out the report at the end of the study. The report

should include observations on usefulness of the scheme in respect of its outcomes and

suggestions for improvements, if any, for its continuation.

Duration

The evaluation will be completed in 4 months time after the award of the study.

Cost

The total cost, as approved, of the study will be released in 4 installments as under:

(i) 30% of the cost will be released to the agency at the time of the award of the study.

(ii) 30% of the cost will be released after the commencement of State visits and field data

collection by the agency.

21

(iii) 20% of the cost will be released after submission of draft report.

(iv) Remaining 20% of the cost will be released after the submission of the final report.

22

CHAPTER III

EVALUATION OF RATIONALIZATION OF MINOR

IRRIGATION STATISTICS SCHEME

3.1 Introduction

The MI (Stat.) Division of the Ministry of Water Resources has awarded the evaluation of

RMIS to the Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute (IASRI), New Delhi. The

evaluation work is to be completed in four months time. The evaluation work is proposed to

be carried out on the basis of review of relevant literature, seeking information from persons

involved in the RMIS scheme at various levels i.e. headquarter, state, district and village

through questionnaires and field visits in various states falling in five zones of the country

and if possible by interaction with some data users. Accordingly, a study of four months

duration was planned by IASRI with 25th July, 2009 as the date of start. A team comprising

scientists and technical persons was constituted to undertake various components of

evaluation study. Side by side four experts were identified for discussion and guidance for

successful completion of the study. They are:

1. Dr S K Raheja Former Director, IASRI

2. Dr B B P S Goel Former Director, IASRI

3. Dr A K Srivastava Former Joint Director, IASRI

4. Dr T B S Rajput Project Director, Water Technology Centre, IARI

3.2 Progress of the Study

The first meeting relating to this study was held on July 25, 2009 to discuss the various

aspects of MI schemes. The meeting was attended by all the members of the study team and

the four outside experts. Sh. V K Arora, ADG, MoWR also attended the meeting. In this

meeting Dr. U C Sud, Principal Investigator of the project made a brief presentation

highlighting the various details including objectives etc. of the study.

In particular, the presentation covered background of the initiation of the Rationalization of

MI scheme. A detailed account of various MI schemes was given. Details of the methodology

being followed in the census of minor irrigation as well as the quarterly reports submitted to

the Ministry were also covered. The observations made by experts were discussed and

23

clarified. A questionnaire was developed and circulated to the experts. The questionnaire was

prepared keeping in view the objectives of the scheme. The experts asked for some extra

material on Minor Irrigation which was provided to them subsequently. It was decided that

the developed questionnaire would be discussed in the next meeting.

The second meeting was held on 10.8.09. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the

questionnaire prepared by the team members with the involvement of outside experts. The

questionnaire was discussed in detail and suggestions for improvements were made.

After a detail discussion in this meeting, it was decided that there should be four types of

questionnaire for collection of information, as follows:

1) Questionnaire for collecting information from the headquarter.

2) Questionnaire for collecting information from the State officials. (Both the above

schedules will cover census as well as quarterly progress reports as a source for

collecting information on MI schemes for the purpose of evaluation).

3) Questionnaire for collecting information at the district level.

4) Questionnaire for collecting information from the primary worker. It was decided that

the team members will modify the existing questionnaires and submit to the four

experts. The next meeting was decided to be organized after this exercise had been

completed.

The next meeting was held on 26.8.09. Sh. VK Arora also attended this meeting. The four

questionnaires devised by the team members were discussed at length and suitable

modifications were made. The modifications made and some extra items to be included in the

questionnaires were discussed in a meeting held on 29.8.09. The four questionnaires were

finalized in this meeting and are given in Annexure.

The questionnaires for collecting information from the headquarter regarding census of minor

irrigation and quarterly report is based on the following broad indicators.

• Indicator on data quality

• Indicator on timeliness in completion of various activities of RMIS

• Indicator on suggestions for improvement

• Indicator on utility of information generated under RMIS

24

The questionnaire for collecting information from the state nodal officer regarding census of

minor irrigation and quarterly report is based on the following indicators:

• Indicator on data quality

• Indicator on timeliness in completion of various activities of RMIS

• Indicator on suggestions for improvement

The questionnaire for collecting information from the district regarding census of minor

irrigation is based on the following indicators:

• Indicator on data quality

• Indicator on timeliness in completion of various activities of RMIS

• Indicator on suggestions for improvement

The questionnaire for collecting information from the village at the primary level regarding

census of minor irrigation is based on the following indicators:

• Indicator on data quality

• Indicator on timeliness in completion of various activities of RMIS

• Indicator on suggestions for improvement

The respective questionnaires were sent to the Minor Irrigation (Statistics) Division of

MoWR, concerned officials in the States and selected districts in the States. The

questionnaires meant for the primary level workers were to be filled up during field visits by

the officials of the IASRI.

25

CHAPTER IV

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM

HEADQUARTER AND NODAL OFFICERS

4.1 Introduction

As mentioned earlier, four different types of questionnaires were designed to collect

information to assess the status of work under the fourth census minor irrigation schemes.

One of the questionnaires was designed for the nodal officers in different states. The

indicator-wise information collected from the designated nodal officers in the prescribed

proforma is summarized in this chapter.

4.2 Summary of Information Reported on Indicator on Data Quality

The summary of responses obtained from nodal officers in respect of indicator on data quality

is presented below:

Chhattisgarh

The nodal officer from Chhattisgarh reported that training was not organized for data

collection at the state level.

Goa

The nodal officer from Goa reported that training was not imparted at the district level.

Jammu & Kashmir

The nodal officer from J&K informed that training was not organized at the district level.

Meghalaya

The nodal officer from Meghalaya reported that training prior to data collection was not

organized at block level. Further, difficulty was faced in collection of data. There was

difficulty in getting village records. Many villages are located in remote places. There was

difficulty in reaching these places. There was also some difficulty in making villagers

understand the different terms.

Madhya Pradesh

The nodal officer from Madhya Pradesh reported that there was difficulty in understanding

the questionnaire. Some items in instructions manual are missing and some part of

instructions manual is not clear. In addition, some definitions are not clear. Besides there is

difficulty in calculating irrigation potential created/utilized.

26

Orissa

The nodal officer from Orissa state informed that no training was organized at block level.

Puducherry The Puducherry nodal officer informed that training was not imparted at block level.

Sikkim

The nodal officer from Sikkim informed that there was difficulty in calculating Irrigation

Potential Created/Utilized.

West Bengal

The nodal officer from West Bengal reported that training was not organized at block and

village level.

4.3 Summary of Information Reported on Indicator on Constraints

In this section we present the constraints reported by the various nodal officers in completing

the various activities of RMIS scheme. The commonly cited constraints are shown in the

Table 4.3.

Table 4.3 Some of the Most Common Constraints Reported by the Nodal Officers State Posts vacant in statistical

cells Training organized at various

levels

Diversion of

primary workers

Funds released

late Senior level

Junior level

Lower level

Andhra Pradesh Y Arunachal Pradesh Assam 2 Y Y Bihar Chhattisgarh 2 1 Y Goa N Y Gujarat Y Haryana Himachal Pradesh 1 Y J & K 2 N Jharkhand 1 4 1 Karnataka 2 1 Kerala Y Madhya Pradesh Y Y Maharashtra 2 Y Y Manipur Meghalaya N Y Mizoram 1 2 Y Nagaland N Y Orissa Punjab 1 7 1 Y Y Rajasthan 1 5 1 Sikkim 1 1 Tamil Nadu 1 1 Y Tripura Uttar Pradesh 1 9 Y Uttarakhand

27

West Bengal N UT Andaman and Nicobar 1 1 1 Y Chandigarh Dadra & Nagar Haveli 1 Y NCT of Delhi 1 Puducherry 1

It may be seen from Table 4.3 that the commonly reported constraints are in the form of

vacant positions in the statistical cells, training not imparted at various levels, late release of

funds and diversion of primary workers for performing other activities. Besides, some other

constraints were reported by the nodal officers from different states. These are summarized

below.

MoWR

The officials from the MI (Stat.) Division, Headquarter informed that quarterly data were

received in the form of hard copy. One post of Sr. Evaluation officer was vacant.

Andhra Pradesh

The nodal officer from Andhra Pradesh reported that the enumerators were diverted for other

work. Due to this the data collection work suffered. Nodal officers are not connected to each

other by fax. Further, in the absence of any instructions from the Ministry it was not possible

to carry out pilot studies to ascertain the increase in productivity due to minor irrigation

projects.

Arunachal Pradesh

The Arunachal Pradesh nodal officer reported the following problems.

Some confusion came up during filling up the formats in Village Schedule 1. Geographical

area of village: The State Govt. has not yet demarcated the village boundary, hence it was

difficult to specify the geographical area. Govt. of India may like to exempt the geographical

area till finalization of boundary.

Project ownership: In case of very old projects the villagers were unable to provide the detail

records.

Distance from one well to another well: In the ground water schedule it was difficult to

ascertain this parameter because of very scanty ground water development and difficult hilly

terrain of the state.

28

Assam

The Assam nodal officer reported that data collection work was delayed due to elections and

floods. Data entry also got delayed due to delay in data collection. Nodal officer was

connected to MoWR only through fax and phone. Nodal officers were connected to each

other only through phone. The data entry software created problem in data validation.

A & N Island

The nodal officer from A & N Island informed that data collection was delayed due to lack of

sufficient staff.

Bihar

The nodal officer from Bihar reported that the data collection is delayed. This is mainly due

to lack of sufficient staff. There is administrative and financial difficulty faced in

outsourcing the work of MI census.

Chhattisgarh

The Chhattisgarh nodal officer informed that data collection was delayed by 4 months. This

was attributable to the fact that there was strike by the patwaris and the patwaris were

engaged in other priority work. The data entry work was yet to start as the workers were busy

in preparing electoral rolls. The nodal officer was connected only through telephone with

MoWR. The nodal officers were not connected with each other through internet.

Dadra and Nagar Haveli

The nodal officer from Dadra and Nagar Haveli informed that data collection was delayed as

the staff was busy in Livestock and Agriculture Census. The nodal officers are connected to

MoWR only through phone. The sanctioned amount is inadequate.

Delhi

The Nodal officer from Delhi cited the constraints of shortage of staff.

Goa

The nodal officer from Goa reported that village records were difficult to get. The data

collection was delayed by one month due to other priority work. The software by MoWR was

not 100% user friendly. The nodal officers were not connected to each other. The nodal

officer was not connected to MoWR through internet, phone and fax.

The nodal officer from the state of J&K reported that sanction for outsourcing data entry not

received. Nodal officers are not connected to each other. Also, funds released are not fully

utilized as data entry decision is pending.

29

Gujarat

The Gujarat nodal officer cited difficulty in data collection work. There was difficulty in

understanding the instruction manual and it was translated in Gujarati language. Farmers

were generally not available for providing the required information. There was difficulty in

getting the village records (Talati was not responding properly). Data collection was delayed

by more than one year due to lack of sufficient staff. The involvement of primary workers in

panchayat and assembly election work also resulted in delay in data collection. Due to delay

in data collection work the data entry was also delayed. Other reasons for delayed data entry

work were lack of sufficient staff, delay in awarding data entry work to an outside agency.

Further, the nodal officers are not connected among themselves via internet. The sanctioned

amount was not fully utilized as it was released late.

Himachal Pradesh

The nodal officer from Himachal Pradesh reported that the farmers were not cooperative. Due

to other priority work, the data collection was delayed by one year. Due to lack of sufficient

staff and funds (second installment still awaited) the data entry work was delayed. The nodal

officer was connected to MoWR only through telephone. The nodal officers were connected

to one another only through phone. There was one vacant post of Assistant Research Officer.

This was a major constraint in completing the assigned activities of RMIS scheme.

Jharkhand

The Jharkhand nodal officer informed that data collection was delayed as it started late and it

will be completed in March, 2010. Data entry was delayed due to delay in data collection.

Nodal officer was not connected to MoWR through Internet. The statistical cell was not

functioning well due to many vacant posts. Quarterly progress reports were not being sent.

Karnataka

The Karnataka nodal officer reported that Nodal officers are connected to each other by

phone only. There are three posts lying vacant. Due to the vacant positions it was not possible

to organize special surveys between two censuses as also pilot studies to ascertain the

increase in productivity due to minor irrigation projects. Further, the funds released were not

adequate.

Kerala

The Kerala nodal officer informed that there was difficulty faced in data collection work as

the farmers were not cooperative. Many a times, the farmers were not available. Considerable

30

difficulty was faced in getting village records. Due to lack of sufficient staff and funds, data

collection was completed 8 months after the target date. Due to delay in data collection work

the data entry work also got delayed. Other constraints reported were in the form of problem

of adoption of software to Kerala pattern and delay in getting the sanction. Special surveys

and pilot studies were not being organized.

Madhya Pradesh

The nodal officer from Madhya Pradesh reported constraints arising out of lack of sufficient

staff, lack of sufficient funds for carrying out the various activities of RMIS in timely and

efficient manner. The available computers are insufficient. Further, there was delay in

awarding the data entry work as it was outsourced.

Maharashtra

The nodal officer from Maharashtra reported that data collection was delayed due to lack of

sufficient staff and priority to other important work. The data entry was delayed due to delay

in field data collection work. The nodal officer are not connected with MoWR through

internet. Further, money has not been released.

Manipur

The nodal officer from Manipur reported that the five hill districts of Manipur whose

geographical area comprises nearly 90% of the total geographical area of the State do not

maintain any land records of their own. Also, very often the village Chiefs/Members/Gram

Pradhans to whom the field enumerators go for enquiries regarding the information of the

village concerned do not have adequate knowledge about the general information of the

village like name, geographical area, cultivable area etc. as maintained in the revenue records

of the State Government. It creates a lot of problems in ascertaining certain important

parameters of the census like the geographical area, cultivable area, Irrigation Potential

Created, Irrigation Potential Utilized etc.

Meghalaya

The Meghalaya nodal officer cited the constraint of difficulty faced in collection of data.

There was difficulty in getting village records. Many villages are located at remote places.

Due to this there was difficulty in reaching these places. Further, there was difficulty faced in

making villagers understand the different terms. Data collection work was delayed due to

priority for other work and many villages in remote areas were not easily accessible. Data

31

entry work was also delayed due to priority to other work. The nodal officer was only

connected to MoWR through telephone and fax.

Mizoram

The nodal officer from Mizoram informed that the data collection work for the fourth census

was given to a different department.

Orissa

The nodal officer from Orissa reported that Nodal officers in different states are not

connected to MoWR through internet or even to each other by fax/ internet. There are no

meetings between nodal officers of different states. Further, due to lack of manpower and in

the absence of instructions from the Ministry, studies regarding reconciliation of

discrepancies in figures of area irrigated as reported in agricultural statistics and in periodical

progress reports and organizing pilot studies to ascertain the increase in productivity due to

minor irrigation projects are not taken up.

Puducherry

The nodal officer from Puducherry informed that time target for data collection was March,

2008 but was completed in Nov., 2008. The main reason for delay in data collection work

was that the primary workers were busy in tsunami relief work. Data entry work was still

going on and is likely to be completed in Nov., 09. The delay in data entry work is

attributable to delay in data collection work. Further, there was software problem which was

rectified by MoWR. This also delayed the data entry work.

Punjab

The Punjab nodal officer reported that data collection work was delayed due to lack of

sufficient staff and priority to other work. The state officers were connected to MoWR only

through phone and this was also true among nodal officers. The full amount sanctioned had

not been spent as the sanctioned was given late. Further, the special surveys in between two

census for estimating yard-sticks of additional area irrigated for different categories of Minor

irrigation projects with breakup for food and non food crops were not being taken up due to

absence of necessary guidelines.

Rajasthan

The nodal officer from Rajasthan cited fund constraints and absence of guidelines for failure

to ascertain reasons for the disuse of projects through special surveys as also the rate of

depreciation due to siltation of surface water storage projects.

32

Sikkim

The nodal officer from Sikkim informed that there was difficulty in getting the records. The

data entry was delayed due to insufficient number of computers. The nodal officers were not

connected to each other through internet, fax and phone.

Tamil Nadu

The Tamil Nadu nodal officer informed that data collection was delayed due to other

important work like finalization of village accounts in jama bandhi. The data entry was

delayed due to general elections and jama bandhi. Further, the nodal officers were connected

to MoWR only through telephone. The amount sanctioned was not fully utilised due to

administrative reasons. The other problems faced were difficulty in assessing the diameter of

shallow tube well. It was difficult to measure the depth of shallow and deep tube well. Also,

the farmer was unable to recall the cost of construction of old wells. It was difficult to

measure accurately the distance between two schemes. Also, the farmers were generally not

available for providing information.

Uttar Pradesh

The nodal officer from Uttar Pradesh informed that the difficulty was faced in getting records

i.e. Khasra Register to fill up the village schedule. FF

Further, the UP nodal officer reported that due to shortage of staff it was not possible to carry

out special surveys in between two censuses as also organization of pilot studies to ascertain

the increase in productivity due to minor irrigation projects.

West Bengal

The nodal officer from West Bengal reported that data collection was delayed due to lack of

sufficient staff. The data entry was delayed due to lack of sufficient staff and delay in data

collection completion. The nodal officers were not connected to each other. There were

problems in conducting validation programme.

4.4 Summary of Information Reported on Indicator on Suggestions for

Improvement

Some of the important points suggested by the various state nodal officers are summarized in

Table 4.4.

33

Table 4.4 Summary of responses obtained from the nodal officers on indicator on

suggestions for improvement State Vehicle Computer Office space Additional staff

requirement Furniture

Andhra Pradesh 1 25 26 Arunachal Pradesh Assam 1 2 9T+9C+5A Bihar Chhattisgarh 1 2 Goa Gujarat Haryana Himachal Pradesh 3 J & K 1 5 5 R 10C+5T Jharkhand Karnataka 1 Y Kerala 1 5 1 R 1 Madhya Pradesh 1 1 Maharashtra 2+1P+U 3 R Manipur 2 Meghalaya 1 1 2 Mizoram Nagaland 1 2+1P 1B 3 2T+2C+1A Orissa 2 10 4 9 Punjab Rajasthan 1 1 2+1P+1U 1 Sikkim 1 Y 5 Y Tamil Nadu 1 2+1L+1PH Tripura Uttar Pradesh 1 2 Uttarakhand West Bengal Y Y UT Andaman and Nicobar 1 Y Chandigarh Dadra & Nagar Haveli 1 NCT of Delhi Puducherry 1+ 1LP A=Almirah, B=Building, C= Chair, L=Laser printer, P=Printer, PH=Photocopier, R=Room,

T=Table, U= UPS.

From the Table 4.4 it is clear that a majority of nodal officers require new PCs, a vehicle,

additional staff for timely and efficiently completion of assigned work. Some of the nodal

officers require furniture and additional space.

Besides, some other suggestions were made for improvement.

MoWR

The officials from the MI (Stat.) Division, Headquarter suggested that monthly progress

report to be submitted online. Reports to be given using GIS. Census work should be given

more publicity. Concepts regarding submission of QPR data to be cleared through regular

34

regional meetings. Two big rooms, two small rooms , three new computers, three computer

tables, small almirah, two big tables, provision for mineral water for MI (Stat.) Division.

Compatibility with GIS not fully covered. One additional post of STA may be filled up on

regular basis having statistics background.

Andhra Pradesh

The following suggestions were given by nodal officer from Andhra Pradesh:

The items in the schedule pertaining to cost of construction and year of construction of any

MI scheme should be recorded only when the particular MI scheme was taking place between

previous census and present census. For efficient functioning of the scheme a standard

inspection format has to be designed for furnishing of field inspection reports for uniformity.

Otherwise the consolidation of collected information is not possible. The format may contain

the following particulars:

1. Name of the Village/Mandal/Revenue village with date

2. No. of schemes checked (scheme wise)

3. Details of interaction with the farmers / Scheme owners.

4. Data as observed and verified by Supervising Officer and as recorded/

5. Instruction issued to primary worker keeping in view the village condition.

Further, the enumeration of Minor Irrigation Sources should commence before one or two

months of closure of reference year and should be completed within a month or two after

completion of reference year. Necessary steps should be taken to conduct the survey very

close to reference year, as it was enquiry based method. Otherwise due to reasons of loss of

memory of the farmers and Non-recording of village records there was a likelihood of loss in

the quality of data.

Generally, the State Agricultural Statistics Authority (SASA) compiles the data crop wise and

Irrigation source wise every year. The Census data of Minor Irrigation need to be compared

with that of SASA figures for cross verification purpose.

Information on Ground Water Level in Village Schedule was approximately given due to

which large variations were noticed in the same village.

State level officers supervision of data collection work was essential at the time of collection

of data.

Similarly officers from Govt. of India may also be involved in supervision at the time of

enumeration of data at field.

35

Assam

The Assam nodal officer informed that there may be more than one pump in a single

scheme having different capacities. There was no provision for entering the number of

pumps and H.P. of all the pumps. This aspect needed to be looked into and necessary

corrections in the schedules be made.

Delhi

The Nodal officer from Delhi was of the opinion that funds should be provided for data

collection for quarterly progress reports.

Goa

The nodal officer from Goa was of the view that funds should be increased.

Himachal Pradesh

There was a suggestion from the nodal officer of Himachal Pradesh that the funds under

RMIS scheme to each state be sent directly to nodal officer rather than the funds getting

routed through the State Finance Department. There was also a suggestion to enhance the

honorarium. Further, a suggestion was also made that a directive be sent to IPH Department

to keep upto date record of each source of irrigation along with cost of construction of the

scheme, cost of machinery and cost of maintenance.

Jharkhand

The nodal officer from Jharkhand suggested that Census of Minor Irrigation schemes should

be executed with field workers of Minor Irrigation Department.

Karnataka

Thus the Karnataka nodal officer made a suggestion that funds should be released in two

rather than three installments.

Kerala

The nodal officer from Kerala state gave following suggestions for improvement in the work

of RMIS scheme:

i) Suggestion of the owner of the scheme may also be obtained at the time of data collection.

ii) The reporting agencies and the staff of RMIS cell may be given awareness/training

programmes through the MoWR.

iii) Review meetings may be conducted periodically where the purpose and importance of the

collection of MI data may be informed to the reporting agencies from MoWR.

The following suggestions were made for improvement of quarterly data:

Lead district bank should be issued instructions to submit the Quarterly report within a month

after the end of quarter

36

Further, the Kerala nodal officer informed that the Kerala State is peculiar in some ways. The

enumerator has to travel long distance for data collection work. Thus the present criteria of

allocation of funds is not satisfactory. Keeping in view the peculiarities of Kerala State the

Honorarium of enumerator need to be increased to Rs 1000/= per panchayat from Rs 300/=

per panchayat. Contingencies to be increased to Rs 150/= per panchayat from Rs 75/= per

panchayat. Honorarium for state level official should be increased from Rs 8000/=. Currently,

the work of data collection was carried out by overseers and clerks under MI division of

irrigation department. It should be entrusted to some other government agency.

Maharashtra

The nodal officer from Maharashtra State indicated following problems:

• Three departments were involved in data collection work

The census work was carried out by major three Departments i.e. Minor irrigation,

Zilla parishad & Water resources, but they were not having proper co-ordination &

mutual co-operation.

• No independent staff

As there was no independent technical staff for census work, the staff of the three

Departments carried out the census work. Due to the multiplicities of agencies the

field work got delayed.

• Second priority for census work

As the field work was carried out by various Departments, it was expected that the

validation of data is also done by the respective Departments, but response and

priority for the census work in the validation was less.

The nodal officer advocated that the contingency per village be increased from Rs 75 to Rs

100.

Manipur

The Manipur nodal officer suggested that necessary efforts be made on the part of the state

Government Departments which were implementing Minor Irrigation schemes in their state

for formation of Water User Associations for each minor irrigation scheme prior to its

commission if such Associations were not formed earlier. These bodies maintain most

reliable information about the potential created and potential utilized of the minor irrigation

scheme. Necessary Legislation may be made if necessary to achieve this goal. Further, a

suggestion was made that conduct of Special Survey of few selected villages of the State for

obtaining the norms for the creation and utilization of potential of irrigation by different types

37

of minor irrigation structures and rate of depreciation of the scheme in between two censuses

was considered very much necessary.

Meghalaya

The nodal officer from Meghalaya suggested that the honorarium to be paid to the primary

worker should be in terms of number of MI schemes covered rather than number of villages

covered.

Nagaland

The nodal officer from Nagaland suggested that honorarium for carrying out census work

should be increased.

Orissa

The nodal officer from Orissa suggested that the statistical cell may be created in all the

reporting agencies to deal with M.I. statistics. This will help in effective monitoring of the

programme at the state level, collection of quality and reliable data and creation of a database

on MI sector.

Further, with respect to the item in the schedule regarding distance of the nearest well, the

nodal officer felt that a clarification was needed whether the distance to the nearest well is

within the village or outside the village in case of a single project in the village. The nodal

officer also opined that there was no checkpoint in the item ‘total schedules”, which was the

sum of the items “ground water schedules” and “surface water schedules”. Another point

made was that the software provided by MoWR takes more time because of frequent use of

tab and enter keys. The Directorate wanted to develop its own software.

Puducherry

The Puducherry nodal officer felt that there is a need to increase the honorarium.

Punjab

The Punjab nodal officer suggested that standardization of field survey work may be carried

out and notified at National level so that exact number of man hours required to carry out

survey for a state can be worked out. This way requirement of field staff can be calculated

and requisitioned by the state authority.

The Census does not collect the information for those cultivators who have agricultural land

but did not have their own MI Scheme. This information could be very useful for developing

the future plans. There must be provision to incorporate the information about the area

irrigated for the Food Crop and Non Food Crops. For computerization of the census data, a

unique code for the Revenue Village must be generated to access the database. Presently it

was done on the basis of State, District and Block Code.

38

The posts sanctioned for Statistical Cell were temporary in nature i.e. for five years only. Due

to this the State Govt. did not allow to post regular staff in regular pay scale. State Govt.

allow to fill up the post on fixed pay. The persons already working on regular pay scale were

not interested to join the Statistical Cell. This was creating problems in efficient functioning.

The census of Minor Irrigation be given more publicity.

The manual should be in local language and technical terms should be more elaborated.

There should be a separate proforma for supervision. More meetings with MoWR were

required.

Tamil Nadu

The nodal officer from Tamil Nadu suggested that funds should be released timely and in

only one installment. The nodal officer also informed that it was difficult to find the depth of

shallow and deep tube well, it was difficult to find out the diameter of the well and bore well.

The cost of construction of old wells cannot be ascertained. Thus, these three items should be

deleted. Further, there was a suggestion that the total sanctioned amount be increased by

20%.

West Bengal

The West Bengal nodal officer advocated frequent field visits for improvement in data

quality. Further, more frequent interaction between MoWR and nodal officer was suggested.

The nodal officer also suggested that fund allocation be increased.

39

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION OBTAINED AT DISTRICT

LEVEL

5.1 Introduction Field visits were made in ten states in the different zones of the country. Two villages each in

a district having at least two MI schemes were visited in two states each from North, South,

West, East & Central and North Eastern zone. Specifically, the team members involved in the

study visited Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Assam,

Meghalaya, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand States. The questionnaire testing was carried

out in Union Territory of Delhi. The summary of information obtained, in the prescribed

proforma, at the district level is provided in the next section.

5.2 Details of Information Obtained at District Level Andhra Pradesh

The district level officials from Andhra Pradesh reported that the data collection work was

done by State Govt. Staff and the training was organized at district level for officers at

Mandal level. The instruction manual & schedules were provided in local language and there

was no difficulty in understanding them. No difficulty was faced in data collection work.

Four months time was given for data collection but it was completed in six months time as at

that time 30 to 40% posts of Village Revenue Officer (Primary worker) were vacant. In this

district a total of 130 villages were inspected by CPO, Asstt. Director & two Statistical

officers. The time target for sending schedules (in CD’s) was March. 2008 but it was sent in

April, 2008 as data entry work was delayed. The schedules were kept at district (HQ) and

only entered data CD’s were sent to State (HQ). Four meetings were held during census

period in the district and 16 meetings at Mandal level. The district officers were connected to

nodal officer through phone and fax.

Assam

The team members visited district KAMRUP METRO in Assam. The district level officer

has no email address, no fax, no telephone. Mobile No. (94350-47945) mentioned. The

training was organized at district. No difficulty was faced in understanding instructions

manual or data collection on any item. The time target fixed for data collection was

February, 2008 but it was completed in May, 2009 because of priority to other work. At

district level, 10 villages were supervised while 70 villages were supervised at block level.

40

The time target for sending schedules to State (HQ) was May, 2008 but these were sent in

May 2009 because of priority to other important work. Eight meetings were held between

district officials & nodal officer of the State. The district officers are connected to nodal

officer only through phone. Data entry problems in terms of validation errors were reported.

Delhi

The data collection work was done by the village level workers. The training for data

collection was organized. The instruction manual was provided. The difficulties faced in

understanding the instruction was particularly in calculating the irrigation potential created

and utilized. No difficulty was faced in data collection. The target date fixed for data

collection was 31 December 2007 but the data collection work was completed on March

2008. The reasons of delay were lack of sufficient staff, lack of sufficient fund and priority

to other important work. The data collection work of 14 villages was inspected at block level.

The data entry work was not being done at district level. There was delay in sending the filled

in schedules to the state headquarter. The date fixed for sending the Schedules was 31

December 2007 but these were sent on March 2008. The reasons of delay were lack of

sufficient staff, lack of sufficient fund and priority to other important work. The suggestions

given by respondent were as follows:

More Staff be provided for data collection.

Funds should be made available in time.

More time should be given for completion of census work.

Gujarat

The data collection work here was done by State Govt. staff. The training for data collection

was organized. There was no difficulty faced in use of instructions manual. Some

difficulties were faced in data collection as in some cases farmers were not available and

sometimes there was difficulty in getting village records. The time target fixed for data

collection was March, 2009 but it was completed in June 2009 because of lack of staff, lack

of funds and priority to other important work. The time target fixed for sending data in CD

was March, 2009 but it was actually sent in June 2009. The reason for delay was lack of

funds and delay in awarding contract for data entry. Four meetings were held at block level

with district officers. The block officers were connected to district officers through personal

contact and telephone only. The suggestion was that the honorarium should be raised to

Rs.500/- per village up to 50 schemes, for additional Rs.100/- for additional 50 schemes.

Jammu & Kashmir

41

The officials from Jammu and Kashmir reported that the patwaris were not conversant with

English, so there was a difficulty in understanding the instructions manual. There were

weather constraints in data collection. Schedules were dispatched late due to Yatra, VIP

movements and control of multiple authorities. A suggestion was made that a refresher course

for patwaris should be conducted for better data quality. The enumerators should be provided

with translated version of proforma in Urdu.

Jharkhand

District level officers from Jharkhand reported that some part of instructions manual were not

clear. Also, some of the definitions were not clear. Further, there was difficulty in calculating

Irrigation Potential Created and Utilized. Difficulties were faced in data collection as farmers

were generally not available. Sometimes the farmer was not co-operative. There was

difficulty in getting records. At the field level there was difficulty in getting expenditure

figures on MI schemes, irrigated area etc. Data collection was delayed due to lack of

sufficient staff, lack of funds, priority to other work like elections in the state. The officials

informed that the schedules would not be sent in time due to lack of sufficient staff, lack of

funds, priority to other work like elections. District level officers were not able to

communicate effectively as they were not connected by fax and internet. It was suggested

that the funds should be allocated in time and state level training be organized.

Meghalaya

Here the team members visited the East Khasi Hill district. The data collection work here was

carried out by the State Government staff posted in the district. The training for data

collection was organized at the district level. Difficulty in data collection was reported as in

many cases the farmers were not cooperative. In some cases there was problem of getting

access to village records. The data entry was carried out at the district level and it was

completed in time.

Orissa

In Orissa state the visit was made in Cuttack district. District Statistical Officer had no Fax.

The data collection agency engaged in data collection work was Employees of State

Government. The training was organized for the primary workers. There was no difficulty

faced in use of instructions manual and data collection. The concept and definitions were

clear. The time target for data collection was June 2008. The data collection work was

completed in time i.e. June 2008. The district statistical officer reported that there was no

provision of reporting or keeping the record of supervision work of data collection. The

supervision of MI census work was carried out separately as well as with supervision work of

42

other schemes also. There were no facilities of data entry at district level. The target of

sending the filled in schedules was October 2008. The actual date of dispatch of schedules

was December 2008. The delay was caused by time taken for completion of scrutiny of

schedules. Only one meeting was held with state officers during five years. Mode of

communication between nodal officer and DSO is through meetings and telephone only.

Rajasthan

The district level officials from Rajasthan reported that it was difficult to carry out the data

collection work as the farmer was, in many cases, not available. The farmer was not

cooperative. The data collection was delayed due to lack of sufficient staff. Schedules were

sent late due to lack of sufficient staff, priority to other work. Further, the district level

officers were not connected through fax and internet. The nodal officer from Rajasthan also

reported that the training was provided at the state and district level and it was theoretical.

The training should be provided at the village level and it should be practical oriented. The

instructions manual be made user friendly by giving examples of different situations. The

enumerators were facing problems in recording water stored in respect of surface water

schemes in cubic meter. Ground water resources were different but specific heading i.e.

shallow tube well, deep tube well was not given. This resulted in wrong entries in some

cases.

Tamil Nadu

The district level officials from Tamil Nadu reported that the farmers were not available at

the time of visit to the village. Data completion was delayed due to Jama Bandhi and

election. Data entry was delayed due to election and other priority work. Fax facility was not

good as the machine goes out of order very frequently. Block officers were not connected

through internet. Honorarium for VAO should be increased from Rs 300.00 to Rs 600.00.

Uttar Pradesh

The response at the district level was as follows:

At block level there was no email and fax. The Govt. staff was involved in data collection.

Training was provided at block level to Gram Vikas Adhikari. No difficulty faced in

understanding instructions manual. But, difficulty was faced in data collection from farmers

and getting village records. The target date for data collection was Aug., 08 but it was

completed late due to lack of sufficient staff and priority to other work. The suggestion for

improvement was that the census work be carried out between October to January. More

staff was needed for timely completion of the assigned work.

43

To summarize the district level officials reported problems arising out of non-availability of

farmer, non-cooperation from the farmer, lack of sufficient staff and funds, inadequate

honorarium, absence of basic facilities of communication like fax and internet. Some of the

officials also reported difficulty in understanding the instructions manual.

In view of the difficulties reported by the district level officials it is recommended that the

nodal officers ensure that the enumerators have access to village level records. The

Instructions manual be made self explanatory and practical oriented, the existing network

needs to be strengthened, the census work be given more publicity among the farmers for

getting cooperation from them. The vacant posts need to be filled up urgently and timely

availability of sanctioned funds be ensured.

44

Chapter VI

SUMMARY OF INFORMATION OBTAINED THROUGH

FIELD VISITS

6.1 Introduction The team members made visits in various States and Union Territories. Two States/Union

Territories were visited in Northern, Southern, Eastern, Western, Central and North Eastern

zones of the country. One district and within a district two villages were visited covering at

least two MI schemes. During the field visits the officials inspected the MI scheme and met

the concerned primary workers and other officials involved in the RMIS scheme. The

summary of the information through field visits is given in the next section.

6.2 Details of Information Obtained Through Field Visits Andhra Pradesh

• In Andhra Pradesh the team members visited the district Medak. The two villages visited

in the district were Lakdaram and Koulanpet. The data collection work was done by

Village Revenue Officer. In both the villages the training for data collection was

organized at the Mandal level. There was no difficulty faced by the primary level worker

in understanding the instructions manual & data collection work. The time target for data

collection was October, 2007. It was collected in time in both the villages. The filled in

Schedules were sent to district (HQ) in time. Weekly meetings were held every Monday

in village Koulanpet while monthly meetings were held in Lakdaram village. The primary

workers were connected to Mandal/district officials through phone & personal meetings.

The field inspection revealed that Col 5 (b) of Schedule 2 (Surface Water Scheme) was

wrongly filled up in Koulampet village.

• Out of 113 (Lakdaram village) Ground Water Schemes, data entry in respect of only 80

schemes had been completed. The suggestion made by the primary worker was that strict

instruction should be given to District Revenue Officer for conduct of MI census work

and some time period be fixed exclusively for MI work only.

Assam

In Assam state the team members visited village Salana and Malaibari of Kamroop Metro

district. The field visit revealed that the Khasra number was not recorded as it did not exist in

the land record system in the state. On checking the entries made in the schedule for village

45

Malabari it was found that in Schedule –II serial number 6, the year was not recorded in

terms of its specified code. Cost of construction and maintenance of the scheme had not been

recorded (Village Salana).

Delhi

The primary workers reported that training was organized. No difficulty faced in

understanding of instructions. The main difficulty faced in data collection was in getting the

village records. Three month time was given for data collection during the year 2007-08. The

actual date of completion was February 2008. The data collection was delay due to priority

to other important work. The delay in submitting filled in schedules to the concerned officer

was also due to priority to other important work. Two meetings were held with district/block

level officers. The primary worker is discussed the problems with officer personally. No

addition information is required to be collected on MI. Suggestions given by primary

workers are as follows:

Farmers are not aware about the cost of construction of the scheme. So this information may

not be collected.

Training for data collection should be given in better way.

Gujarat

• In Gujarat the two villages visited were Mahijada and Gulabpura in Gandhinagar district.

Field data was collected by work assistant/ technical assistant/ clerk. The primary workers

reported difficulty in understanding the instructions, calculating Irrigation Potential

Created/Utilized. There were problems of data collection as farmers were not available

and also it was difficult to get the village records i.e. Khasra register. Primary workers

were connected to district officials only through phone. Data collection was delayed due

to priority given to other work. The training imparted was theoretical. A suggestion was

made that the training should be practical oriented. The incentive given for data collection

was not adequate as several visits were required to be made which is costly and time

consuming.

• The inspection revealed that only the schemes reported in revenue records were recorded

in schedules while other schemes operating in the village have been left out. Thus,

extensive supervision of work of primary worker is required for improvement in data

quality.

46

Jharkhand

The field visit in Jharkhand was made in the Ramgarh District. The team members visited

Kaitha and Chhattar Mandu villages of Ramgarh block of Ramgarh district. The field visit

revealed that the data collection work was being done by Rojgar Sewak. The work of data

collection has not been completed so far. It was informed that the data collection would be

completed by March 2010. The delay was caused by late start of training programme by the

MOWR. Besides, the staff was engaged in other departmental work. The data entry work

was in progress.

The concerned officials informed that collection of quarterly data on minor irrigation

schemes has not yet started as the posting of staff in statistical cells was still awaited.

On inspection, it was found that the data recorded in the Schedules was not up to the mark.

Some of items in which mistakes were observed are the following:

• Year of commencement of scheme,

• Nature of scheme,

• Diameter of well,

• Depth of well,

• Distance from nearest well,

• Lifting device,

• Source of energy,

• Irrigation Potential Created and Utilized.

• Information on Irrigation Potential Utilized recorded at both the places i.e. serial number

26 to 30 and 33 to 37 (as supplementary) schedule-II (Surface water scheme) and 27 to 31

and 34 to 38 (as supplementary) schedule-I (Ground water scheme).

Clearly, extensive supervision is required for collection of error free data.

Jammu & Kashmir

• The field visit in Jammu and Kashmir was made in Anantnag district. Here the

Patwari was the primary worker. The team members visited villages Batkoot and

Grendaish.

• It was found that the name of major/medium scheme: Lalwani Kul (village sch. serial

no. 2) was mismatch with serial no. 20 schedule 2 (surface water scheme).

• Schedule wise summary of MI scheme was not filled-up in village Batkoot.

• Patwari was not clear about filling MI schedules.

• Data on the items cost of construction and maintenance of scheme was not recorded.

47

• The team members felt that the schedules in some cases were filled up from records

and not on the basis of actual visits to the farmers.

• Schedules were not properly checked by supervisory officers.

Meghalaya

The visit here was made in the village Ningmysong and Umsawli of East Khasi Hill district. The

data collection work was done by Junior Engineer and Sectional Assistant. As in case of Assam

here also the Khasra number was not recorded as it did not exist in the land record system in the

state. The information recorded at serial 39 (a) of schedule-II (surface water scheme) (Designed

storage in cubic meter) was irrelevant because all the schemes were surface flow types. There

was a problem of merging the data files of two districts as informed by Senior System Analyst,

NIC, Meghalaya.

Orissa

• The field visit in Orissa State was made in Cuttack district. The team members visited the

villages Bentakar and Kurangapradhan of Cuttack district. The data collection work was

being done by Statistical Field Surveyor (SFS).

• There were problems in data entry and data validation software provided by the MoWR

as told by the State officials.

• It was very difficult to get information on cost of construction schemes. This was due to

the fact that many of the schemes were very old. Due to the long time gap the farmer was

not able to recall the required details. The farmer was unable to provide information on

cost of maintenance of the scheme.

Rajasthan

• The field visit in Rajasthan was made in Ajmer district. The team members visited two

villages namely Tilonia and Buharu of Kishangarh tehsil of Ajmer district. The data

collection work here was done by the Patwaries.

• The team members here observed that although volume of pond was recorded but Patwari

could not explain how it was calculated as the shape of ponds were irregular (Surface

water scheme Schedule-II serial number 39 (a))

• The check dam was wrongly recorded as pond.

• Farmers were unable to give the cost of construction of the scheme particularly in respect

of dug wells as most of the dug wells were very old and were not in use since long.

• Some of the Patwaires reported that the instructions manual was not very clear.

48

Tamil Nadu

Two members of the team visited villages Sevillimedu I and Sevillimedu II of Kanchipuram

district. Data were collected by Village Administrative Officer. On inspection it was found that

Col 14 Sch I was wrongly coded. It was an open channel kucha but code used was of Pucca

channel (Sevillimedu I).

Uttar Pradesh

• In Uttar Pradesh the team members visited villages Sarai Mihi and Karauli of Banki

Block of Barabanki district. The data collection work here was being done by the Gram

Vikas Adhikari. Although data on eight ponds were recorded, but only one pond was

being used for irrigation by two to three farmers only.

• Where as the code allotted for pond is 2, it was recorded 1 in most of the cases.

• In place of khasra number only serial number had been recorded (serial number 4 of

schedule 1 ground water scheme) and it was not recorded in schedule – II (Village Sarai

Mihi)

• The farmers informed that all the water bodies in the village were ponds. The code

earmarked for pond was 2. The code of nature of the scheme at serial number 7 was

wrongly recorded as 1 for all the schemes in the village Sarai Mihi.

• Type of Scheme recorded as shallow tube well (code 2) and the codes 1-3 were assigned

for nature of the scheme but these were recorded 4.

To summarize, the field visits revealed that the primary workers experienced difficulty in

getting information from farmer about the cost of construction of the scheme, recording the

depth of well and calculating irrigation Potential Created. The required cooperation from

farmer was not forthcoming. The inspection of Schedules revealed that wrong entries were

made in some cases. Some of the primary workers reported difficulty in understanding some

of the items in instructions manual like working out distance from the nearest well, working

out Irrigation Potential Created etc. Problems in data entry were also reported. A common

problem reported was that the honorarium provided for data collection work is inadequate.

Further, it was seen that source wise net irrigated area was not recorded under serial number

6 to 10.

There is a need to strengthen the supervision aspect of data collection. A supervisors manual

including a proforma for inspection reports need to be devised. The work of supervision be

entrusted to experienced persons only and the supervision work should commence right in the

beginning stage so that the same mistakes are not committed till the end. Provisions be made

49

for providing training to trainers. There is a need to develop an efficient data entry software

as also a need to review the current criterion of fixation of honorarium. In view of the

problems reported by the primary workers in terms of data collection on certain items,

necessary modifications in the Schedules is recommended. A permanent record of schemes

covered in the 4th census be maintained by the village level officials. This should serve as

base for the next census. During the time of next census the available data base should be

updated.

50

ANNEXURE I

INDIAN AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS RESEARCH INSTITUTE

(ICAR) LIBRARY AVENUE, NEW DELHI-110012

Evaluation of Rationalization of Minor Irrigation (MI) Statistics Scheme

Questionnaire for Collection of Information from MoWR (To be filled-up by official of MOWR)

A. Identification Particulars:

S. No. Particulars Information 1 Name of the respondent 2 Designation of the respondent3 Head quarter’s address MOWR, New Delhi

B. Census data:

1 Comments on data quality, data collection and supervision work.

S. No. State Data

quality satisfactory (Y/N)

Data collection Supervision of data collection

Target date

Completion date

Reasons* for delay, if any

Number of villages inspected

Attach inspection reports, if any

1 Andhra Pradesh 2 Arunachal

Pradesh

3 Assam 4 Bihar 5 Chhattisgarh 6 Goa 7 Gujarat 8 Haryana 9 Himachal

Pradesh

10 J & K 11 Jharkhand 12 Karnataka 13 Kerala 14 Madhya Pradesh 15 Maharashtra 16 Manipur

51

17 Meghalaya 18 Mizoram 19 Nagaland 20 Orissa 21 Punjab 22 Rajasthan 23 Sikkim 24 Tamil Nadu 25 Tripura 26 Uttar Pradesh 27 Uttarakhand 28 West Bengal Union Territory 1 Andaman and

Nicobar

2 Chandigarh 3 Dadra & Nagar

Haveli

4 NCT of Delhi 5 Puducherry

*lack of sufficient staff, lack of sufficient funds, priority to other important work, any other (specify) 2 Comments on data entry

S. No. State Target

date Completion Date

If not completed in time, give reasons*

1 Andhra Pradesh 2 Arunachal Pradesh 3 Assam 4 Bihar 5 Chhattisgarh 6 Goa 7 Gujarat 8 Haryana 9 Himachal Pradesh 10 J & K 11 Jharkhand 12 Karnataka 13 Kerala 14 Madhya Pradesh 15 Maharashtra 16 Manipur 17 Meghalaya 18 Mizoram 19 Nagaland 20 Orissa 21 Punjab 22 Rajasthan

52

23 Sikkim 24 Tamil Nadu 25 Tripura 26 Uttar Pradesh 27 Uttarakhand 28 West Bengal Union Territory 1 Andaman and Nicobar 2 Chandigarh 3 Dadra & Nagar Haveli 4 NCT of Delhi 5 Puducherry

* Lack of sufficient number of computers, lack of sufficient trained staff, lack of sufficient funds, any other (specify) 3 Number of visits and mode of interaction between MOWR and Nodal officers

after completion of third census to till now S. No. State Number of visits Mode of interaction*

MOWR to State (Nodal officers)

State (Nodal officers) to MOWR

Internet Telephone Fax

1 Andhra Pradesh 2 Arunachal Pradesh 3 Assam 4 Bihar 5 Chhattisgarh 6 Goa 7 Gujarat 8 Haryana 9 Himachal Pradesh 10 J & K 11 Jharkhand 12 Karnataka 13 Kerala 14 Madhya Pradesh 15 Maharashtra 16 Manipur 17 Meghalaya 18 Mizoram 19 Nagaland 20 Orissa 21 Punjab 22 Rajasthan 23 Sikkim 24 Tamil Nadu 25 Tripura 26 Uttar Pradesh

53

27 Uttarakhand 28 West Bengal Union Territory 1 Andaman and

Nicobar

2 Chandigarh 3 Dadra & Nagar

Haveli

4 NCT of Delhi 5 Puducherry

* Tick only those items used for interaction 4 Which software used for

a) Data entry b) Tabulation c) Other (specify)

5 Is there any delay in completion of census work at the Headquarter?

(Yes / No)

6 If yes, tick the items for delay Reasons* for delay a) Consolidation of data

b) Analysis of data

c) Tabulation of results

d) Report writing

e) Any other (specify)

* Lack of sufficient funds, lack of sufficient staff, lack of sufficient number of computers, any other (specify) 7 Infrastructure

a) Staff position at headquarter Name of post Sanctioned

(Number) Filled-in (Number)

Vacant (Number)

Reasons* for vacant posts

Additional posts** required over and above the sanctioned post, if any

1 2 3 4 5 6

*Ban on filling-up the vacant posts, any other (specify) ** Give both number and type of posts

54

b) Funds released for the States S.No.

State Amount sanctioned (Rs.)

Amount released (Rs.)

Whether released in time (Yes/No)

Whether fully utilized by the states (Yes/No)

If not reasons* for not utilization

Whether sanctioned amount adequate (Yes/No)

1 Andhra Pradesh

2 Arunachal Pradesh

3 Assam 4 Bihar 5 Chhattisgarh 6 Goa 7 Gujarat 8 Haryana 9 Himachal

Pradesh

10 J & K 11 Jharkhand 12 Karnataka 13 Kerala 14 Madhya

Pradesh

15 Maharashtra 16 Manipur 17 Meghalaya 18 Mizoram 19 Nagaland 20 Orissa 21 Punjab 22 Rajasthan 23 Sikkim 24 Tamil Nadu 25 Tripura 26 Uttar Pradesh 27 Uttarakhand 28 West Bengal Union

Territory

1 Andaman and Nicobar

2 Chandigarh 3 Dadra &

Nagar Haveli

4 NCT of Delhi 5 Puducherry

55

* States are using their own funds, Did not carry out the assigned work for which funds were released, Any other (specify)

c) Others (MoWR level) Item Available

(number) Whether adequate (Yes/No)

If not adequate, additional requirement,

Accommodation (area or number of rooms, write clearly)

Vehicle Computer Old

New Furniture Any other* (specify)

* Give both number and type 8 Do some of the concepts and

definitions of Minor Irrigation need to be redefined?

(Yes / No)

9 If yes, give the new concepts and definitions

Use separate sheet

10 Are there any items under MI on which information is not fully covered?

(Yes / No)

11 If yes, give the required information schedule wise.

Village Schedule a) b) c) d) Schedule-1 a) b) c) d) Schedule-2 a) b) c) d)

12 Give the names of organizations which have utilized the census data in last five years. (use separate sheet if required)

a) b) c) d)

13 Is there any other agency involved in collecting similar data?

(Yes/ No)

14 If yes, is there any interaction with the (Yes/ No)

56

agency involved in collecting similar data?

15 Are there any efforts made for data reconciliation between the agencies?

(Yes/ No)

16 Are there any guidelines issued by the Ministry requiring interaction among the Nodal officers on a regular basis?

(Yes/ No)

17 Any suggestion you would like to give for improving the census work of minor irrigation?

Use separate sheet if required

C. Quarterly data 1 Give the sources from which quarterly data are

compiled

1 2 3 4 5

2 Data quality based on verification or cross checking done by MOWR

(for quarterly update) S. No. State Data quality

(satisfactory or not)

Is the quarterly data received in time (Yes/No)

Reasons* for delay

1 Andhra Pradesh 2 Arunachal Pradesh 3 Assam 4 Bihar 5 Chhattisgarh 6 Goa 7 Gujarat 8 Haryana 9 Himachal Pradesh 10 J & K 11 Jharkhand 12 Karnataka 13 Kerala 14 Madhya Pradesh 15 Maharashtra 16 Manipur 17 Meghalaya 18 Mizoram 19 Nagaland 20 Orissa 21 Punjab 22 Rajasthan 23 Sikkim 24 Tamil Nadu 25 Tripura

57

26 Uttar Pradesh 27 Uttarakhand 28 West Bengal Union Territory 1 Andaman and Nicobar 2 Chandigarh 3 Dadra & Nagar Haveli 4 NCT of Delhi 5 Puducherry

* Lack of sufficient staff, Delay in receipt of information from the various departments, Priority to other important work, any other (specify) 3 In what form the quarterly data are received?

a) Hard copy b) CD c) E-mail d) Any other (specify)

4 Are the Annual reports generally brought out in time?

(Yes / No)

5 If no, tick the items reporting delay Reasons* for delay a) Receipt of data

b) Consolidation of data

c) Analysis of data

d) Tabulation of results

e) Report writing

f) Any other (specify)

* Lack of sufficient funds, lack of sufficient staff, lack of sufficient number of computers, postal delay, any other (specify) 6 Suggestions for improvement of work related to

Quarterly data and Annual reports Use separate sheet

Name Designation Signature with date

58

INDIAN AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ICAR)

LIBRARY AVENUE, NEW DELHI-110012

Evaluation of Rationalization of Minor Irrigation (MI) Statistics Scheme

Questionnaire for Collection of Information from State (To be filled-up by Nodal Officer)

A. Identification Particulars:

S. No. Particulars Information 1 Name of the State 2 Name of the respondent 3 Designation of the respondent 4 Email address of the respondent 5 Fax number of the respondent 6 Telephone number of the

respondent

7 Mobile number of the respondent B. Census data:

1 Which agency was identified for data collection?

Govt./ Private

2 Whether the training organized for data collection?

State (Yes/No) District (Yes/No) Block (Yes/No)

3 Was there any difficulty faced in use of instruction manual for data collection?

(Yes/No)

4 If yes, specify a) Understanding the instructions b) Some part of instructions not clear

(specify) c) Some items in instruction manual

are missing (specify) d) Some definitions are not clear

(specify) e) Difficulty in calculating Irrigation

potential created/utilized f) Any other (specify)

5 Whether any difficulty faced in collection of data on a particular item

(Yes / No)

6 If yes, specify a) Farmer not available b) Farmer not cooperative c) Difficulty in getting the records (in

case of village schedule) d) Any other (specify)

59

7 Target fixed for completion of data collection work

Month Year

8 Actual date of completion of data collection

Month Year

9 Give reasons for delay, if any a) Lack of sufficient staff b) Lack of sufficient funds c) Priority to other important work d) Any other (specify)

10 Was there any supervision of data collection work carried out by the nodal officer at the state level?

(Yes / No)

11 If yes, give the number of villages inspected (If more than one supervisory staff inspected the village at the same time, the village should be counted only once)

12 Specify the software used for data entry

13 Target date fixed for completion of data entry?

Month Year

14 Actual date of completion of data entry Month Year

15 Give reasons for delay a) Insufficient number of computers b) Lack of sufficient staff c) Delay in awarding the work in case

of outsourced d) Lack of sufficient funds e) Any other (specify)

16 Whether data entry carried out through outsourcing?

(Yes / No)

17 Is the software provided by MOWR for data scrutiny and data entry user friendly?

(Yes / No)

18 Are there meetings between MOWR and Nodal officers?

(Yes / No)

19 How many meetings held with MOWR during the last five years?

20

Indicate, through which mode the Nodal officer is connected to MOWR? (Tick the relevant mode of communication)

Telephone, Fax, Internet

21 Are the present criteria of allocation of funds adopted by MOWR for census work satisfactory?

(Yes / No)

22 If not, suggest alternate methods

Use separate sheet

23 Indicate amount required for carrying out MI Census work at different levels

a) State b) District c) Block

60

d) Village e) Stationary f) Printing of schedules g) Any other (Specify)

24

Are there any items in the schedules on which information on MI is not fully covered?

(Yes / No)

25 If yes, specify

Village schedule a) b) c) Schedule-1 a) b) c) Schedule-2 a) b) c)

26 Are the nodal officers connected to each other?

(Yes / No)

27 If yes, tick the mode of connectivity? a) Personal meetings b) Internet c) Fax d) Telephone

28 If connected, give the frequency of interaction between the nodal officers

a) As and when required b) Quarterly c) Half yearly d) Yearly

29 Infrastructure at state level

a) Staff position Name of post Sanctioned

(number) Filled-in (number)

Vacant (number)

Reasons* for vacant post

Additional posts ** required over and above the sanctioned posts, if any

1 2 3 4 5 6

*Ban on filling-up the vacant posts, any other (specify) ** Give both number and type of posts

61

b) Funds Amount sanctioned (Rs.)

Released (Rs.)

Whether released in time

Whether fully utilized

If not, reason* for not utilization

Whether sanctioned amount adequate (Yes/No)

1 2 3 4 5 6

* States are using their own funds, did not carry out the assigned work for which funds were released, any other (specify)

c) Others Item Available

(Number) Whether adequate (Yes/No)

If not adequate additional requirement, if any

Accommodation (area or number of rooms, write clearly)

Vehicle Computer Old

New Furniture Any other* (specify) * Give both number and type 29 Give suggestions for improvement of work related to MI

census data Use separate sheet

C. Quarterly data 1 Give the sources from which quarterly

data are compiled

1 2 3 4 5

2 Is the quarterly data sent in time? (Yes / No) 3 Suggestions for improvement of work related to quarterly data Use separate sheet

Name Designation Signature with date

62

INDIAN AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ICAR)

LIBRARY AVENUE, NEW DELHI-110012

Evaluation of Rationalization of Minor Irrigation (MI) Statistics Scheme Questionnaire for Collection of Information from District

(To be filled-up by district level officer involved in MI Scheme)

A. Identification Particulars: S. No. Particulars Information 1 Name of the State 2 Name of the District 3 Name of the respondent 4 Designation of the respondent 5 Email address of the respondent 6 Fax number of the respondent 7 Telephone number of the respondent 8 Mobile number of the respondent

B. Census data:

S. No. Particulars Information 1 Which agency was identified for data

collection? Govt./Private

2 Whether the training was organized for data collection?

(Yes/No)

3 Whether any difficulty faced in use of instruction manual for data collection?

(Yes/No)

4 If yes, specify a) Understanding the instructions b) Some part of instructions not clear

(specify) c) Some items in instruction manual

are missing (specify) d) Some definitions are not clear

(specify) e) Difficulty in calculating Irrigation

potential created/utilized f) Any other (specify)

5 Whether any difficulty faced in data collection on any particular item?

(Yes/No)

6 If yes, specify a) Farmer not available b) Farmer not cooperative c) Difficulty in getting records (in

case of village schedule) d) Any other (specify)

63

7 Target date fixed for completion of data collection work?

Month Year

8 Actual date of completion of data collection work

Month Year

9 If data collection work was not completed in the allotted time, give reasons

a) Lack of sufficient staff b) Lack of sufficient funds c) Priority to other important work d) Any other (specify)

10 Any additional item on which MI data need to be collected?

Village Schedule Schedule-1 Schedule-2

11 How many villages inspected to supervise the data collection work?

a) District level – b) Block level -

12 Whether data entry carried out at the district?

(Yes / No)

13 Target date fixed for sending the filled in schedules to state headquarter?

Month Year

14 Actual date of dispatch of filled in schedules to state headquarter?

Month Year

15 If schedules not sent in time, reasons a) Delay due to insufficient staff b) Lack of sufficient funds c) Priority to other important work d) Delay due to data entry d) Any other (specify)

16 How many meetings held between Nodal officer and district/block officer during last five years for MI census?

17 Indicate through which mode the district / block officers are connected to the Nodal officer?

a) Meeting b) Internet c) Phone d) Fax

18 Any suggestions for improvement of MI census work

Use separate sheet

Name Designation Signature with date

64

INDIAN AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ICAR)

LIBRARY AVENUE, NEW DELHI-110012

Evaluation of Rationalization of Minor Irrigation (MI) Statistics Scheme

Questionnaire for Collection of Information from Village (To be filled-up by Primary worker)

A. Identification Particulars:

S. No. Particulars Information 1 Name of the State 2 Name of the District 3 Name of the Block 4 Name of the Village 5 Name of the Respondent6 Designation of the Respondent

B. Information related to Minor Irrigation Census:

S. No. Particulars Information 1 Whether the training was organized

for data collection? (Yes/No)

2 Was there any difficulty faced in use of instruction manual for data collection?

(Yes/No)

3 If yes, specify a) Understanding the instructions b) Some part of instructions not clear

(specify) c) Some items in instruction manual

are missing (specify) d) Some definitions are not clear

(specify) e) Difficulty in calculating Irrigation

potential created/utilized f) Any other (specify)

4 Whether any difficulty faced in data collection on any particular item?

(Yes/No)

5 If yes, specify a) Farmer not available b) Farmer not cooperative c) Difficulty in getting records (in

case of village schedule) d) Any other (specify)

6 Target date fixed for completion of data collection work?

Month Year

65

7 Actual date of completion of data collection work

Month Year

8 If data collection work was not completed in the allotted time, give reasons

a) Lack of sufficient funds b) Priority to other important work c) Any other (specify)

9 Whether filled in schedules were sent to district/block headquarter in time?

(Yes / No)

10 If not, reasons for delay b) Priority to other important work c) Any other (specify)

11 How many meetings were held with district/block officers during last five years?

12 Indicate through which mode the primary workers are connected to district/block officers? (tick)

Telephone, Fax, Internet

13 Any additional item on which MI census data need to be collected?

Village Schedule Schedule-1 Schedule-2

14 Any suggestions for improvement of MI Census work

Use separate sheet

Name Designation Signature with date

66

ANNEXURE II

FOURTH CENSUS OF MINOR IRRIGATION SCHEMES

REFERENCE YEAR 2006-07

VILLAGE SCHEDULE

I. IDENTIFICATION: (USE 3rd MI CENSUS (2000-01) CODES ONLY

State: ________________ Code: District: _____________________ Code:

Block: _________________ Code: Village: ______________________Code:

Date of Enumeration:

II. SPECIFIC INFORMATION:

1. Is Village Tribal/ Non-Tribal? Code:

Tribal – 1, Non-Tribal -2

2. Name of Major/ Medium Scheme ________________________________

(Note: The information in item 3 to 11 of this schedule shall be based on village records)

3. Geographical Area Ha.

4. Cultivable Area Ha.

5. Net Area Sown Ha.

6. Net Area Irrigated through Canal Ha.

7. Net Area Irrigated through Tanks Ha.

8. Net Area Irrigated through Tubewells Ha.

9. Net Area Irrigated through other wells Ha.

10. Net Area Irrigated through others sources Ha.

11. Total Net Area Irrigated (column 6+7+8+9+10) Ha.

12. Average Ground Water level (in Meters)

13. Number of water body

(a) For irrigation

(b) For non irrigation

14. Whether Water Users Association (WUA) exists in the village Code:

Yes -1, No -2

67

If yes, Number of Water Users Associations:

_____________________________________________________________________

Schedule wise summary of M I schemes in the village

NO. OF GROUND WATER SCHEMES

NO. OF SURFACE WATER SCHEMES

NO. OF TOTAL SCHEMES

Checked by: Signature of Enumerator:

Name: Name:

Designation of Supervisory officer: Designation of Enumerator:

68

FOURTH CENSUS OF MINOR IRRIGATION SCHEMES

REFERENCE YEAR 2006-07

SCHEDULE 1: GROUND WATER SCHEMES

I. IDENTIFICATION: USE 3rd MI CENSUS (2000-01) CODE ONLY

State: _______________________ Code: District: ________________ Code:

Block: _______________________ Code: Village: _________________Code:

Date of Enumeration:

II. SPECIFIC INFORMATION:

1. Serial Number of scheme:

2. Type of Scheme Code:

Dug Well – 1, Shallow Tube well - 2, Deep Tube well - 3

3. Owner of the Scheme (Name in case of individual farmer)

Name __________________________________ Code:

Govt. owned - 1, Co-operative owned - 2, Panchayat owned - 3,

Owned by Group of farmers - 4, Owned by individual farmers - 5, Others – 6

4. Khasra number /Plot No./Survey No. in which the scheme is located

__________________________________

5.(a) Total Holding of owner (in case of individual owner only) Ha.

(b) Social Status of Owner (in case of individual owner only) Code:

Scheduled caste -1, Scheduled tribe – 2, OBC- 3, Others 4

6. Year of Commissioning of the Scheme Code:

On or before 2000-2001 - 1, during 2001-02 - 2, during 2002-03 - 3,

during 2003-04 – 4, during 2004-05 - 5 , during 2005-06 - 6 , during 2006-07 - 7

7. Nature of scheme Code:

Dugwell : Pucca -1, Kuchha -2, Dug-cum-bore well - 3, Others - 4

Shallow Tubewell : Shallow Tube well – 1, Filter point-2, Others - 3

Deep Tubewell : Deep Tube Well - 1, Others - 2

69

8. Details of the scheme

( a ) Depth of the well (in metres)

( b ) Diameter (unit in meters for dug well and mm for tube well )

( c ) Depth of Bore (in meters) (in case of Dug-cum-borewell)

( d) Distance of nearest well (in metres)

9. (a) Cost of construction of the scheme (Rs.)

(b) Cost of machinery (Rs.)

(c) Cost of maintenance during (2006-07) (Rs.)

10. Major source of finance Code:

Bank loan - 1, Government fund - 2, Own savings - 3, Money lender - 4, Others – 5

11. Current Status of the Scheme Code:

In use - 1, Temporarily Not in Use - 2, Permanently Not in use - 3

12. Reason code for Temporarily "not in use" Scheme (code - 2 in item 11) Code:

Non availability of adequate power – 1, Mechanical break down – 2,

Less discharge in the well - 3, Any other reason - 4

13. Reason code for Permanently "not in use" Scheme (code - 3 in item 11) Code:

Due to salinity - 1, Dried up - 2, Destroyed beyond repair - 3

Due to sea water intrusion - 4, Due to industrial effluents - 5,

Due to other reasons - 6

14. Water distribution / application method used Code:

Open Water Channel (lined / pucca) – 1, Open Water Channel (unlined / kucha) - 2

Under ground pipe – 3, Surface pipe - 4, Drip - 5, Sprinkler - 6, Other - 7

15. Lifting device Code:

Submersible pump - 1, Centrifugal Pump - 2, Turbine - 3, Manual/animal - 4, Other - 5

16. Source of energy Code:

Electric - 1, Diesel - 2, Wind Mills - 3, Solar - 4, Manual/animal - 5, Others - 6

17. Horse Power of Lifting device HP

(Ignore if lifting device is manual/animal driven)

70

18. Number of days operating pump (ignore, if lifting device is manual/animal driven)

During Kharif season Days

During Rabi season Days

19. Average hours of pumping per day (ignore, if lifting device is manual/animal driven)

During Kharif season Hrs

During Rabi season Hrs

20. Culturable Command Area Ha.

21. Whether the scheme is located in the command of Major & Medium Schemes like

Canals etc. Code:

No --- 1 (Keep item 34 to item 38 blank)

Yes --- 2 (Keep item 27 to item 31 blank)

Yes (for augmentation only) --- 3 (Keep item 22 to item 38 blank)

SEASON WISE IRRIGATION POTENTIAL CREATED (IPC)

22. Kharif Ha.

23. Rabi Ha.

24. Perennial Ha.

25. Other Ha.

26 Total Ha.

SEASON WISE ACTUAL AREA IRRIGATED DURING 2006-07 (IPU)

27. Kharif Ha.

28. Rabi Ha.

29. Perennial Ha.

30. Other Ha.

31. Total Ha.

32. Whether the scheme is functioning well since its commissioning? (Y / N) Code:

33. If No, Maximum Potential utilised from the Scheme in any year Ha.

71

SEASON WISE AREA IRRIGATED BY THE MINOR IRRIGATION SCHEMES

(DURING 2006-07) AS SUPPLEMENTARY SOURCE IN THE COMMAND OF

MAJOR & MEDIUM SCHEMES

34. Kharif Ha.

35. Rabi Ha.

36. Perennial Ha.

37. Other Ha.

38. Total Ha.

39. Reasons for under utilisation of schemes Code:

Non availability of adequate power – 1, Mechanical break down – 2,

Less discharge in the well - 3, Any other reason - 4, Not applicable – 5

Checked by: Signature of Enumerator:

Name Name

Designation: Designation:

72

FOURTH CENSUS OF MINOR IRRIGATION SCHEMES

REFERENCE YEAR 2006-07

SCHEDULE 2: SURFACE WATER SCHEMES

I. IDENTIFICATION: USE 3rd MI CENSUS (2000-01) CODE ONLY

State: _______________________ Code: District: ____________Code:

Block: _______________________ Code: Village: _____________Code:

Date of Enumeration:

II. SPECIFIC INFORMATION:

1. Serial Number of scheme:

2. Type of Scheme Code:

Surface Flow Scheme – 1, Surface Lift Scheme - 2

3. Owner of the Scheme (Name in case of individual farmer)

Name __________________________________ Code:

Govt. owned - 1, Co-operative owned - 2, Panchayat owned - 3, Owned by Group of farmers

- 4, Owned by individual farmers - 5, Others – 6

4. Khasra number /Plot No. /Survey No. in which the scheme is located

_____________________________

5.(a) Total Holding of owner (in case of individual owner only) Ha

(b) Social Status of Owner (in case of individual owner only) Code:

Scheduled caste -1, Scheduled tribe – 2, OBC- 3, Others 4

6. Year of Commissioning of the Scheme Code:

On or before 2000-2001 - 1, during 2001-02 - 2, during 2002-03 - 3,

during 2003-04 – 4, during 2004-05 - 5 , during 2005-06 - 6 , during 2006-07 - 7

7. Nature of scheme Code:

Surface Flow Scheme: Reservoirs - 1, Tanks -2, Other Storages -3, Permanent diversion

- 4, Temporary diversion - 5

Water conservation-cum-ground water recharge schemes /percolation tanks/check dams etc –

6, Spring Channel - 7, Other - 8

73

Surface lift Scheme: On River - 1, On Stream - 2, On drain/canal - 3,

On Tanks/Ponds/Reservoirs - 4, Others - 5

8. (a) Cost of construction of the scheme (Rs.)

(b) Cost of machinery (Rs.)

(c) Cost of maintenance during (2006-07) (Rs.)

9. Major source of finance Code:

Bank loan - 1, Government fund - 2, Own savings - 3, Money lender - 4, Others - 5

10. Current Status of the Scheme Code:

In use - 1, Temporarily Not in Use - 2, Permanently Not in use - 3

11 . Reason code for Temporarily "not in use" Scheme (code - 2 in item 10) Code:

Non availability of adequate power – 1, Mechanical break down – 2,

Less discharge of water - 3, Storage not filled up fully - 4

Siltation of canal/storage - 5, Breakdown of channels - 6, Any other reason - 7

12 . Reason code for Permanently "not in use" Scheme (code - 3 in item 10) Code:

Due to salinity - 1, Dried up - 2, Destroyed beyond repair - 3,

Due to sinking - 4, Due to other reasons - 5

13. Water distribution / application method Code:

Open Water Channel (lined / pucca) – 1, Open Water Channel (unlined / kucha) - 2

Under ground pipe – 3, Surface pipe - 4, Drip - 5, Sprinkler - 6, Others -7

14. Lifting device (in case of Surface lift scheme) Code:

Submersible pump - 1 , Centrifugal Pump - 2, Turbine - 3, Manual/animal - 4,

Other - 5

15. Source of energy Code:

Electric - 1, Diesel - 2, Wind Mills - 3, Solar - 4, Manual/animal - 5, Others - 6

16. Horse Power of Lifting device (ignore, if lifting device is manual/animal driven) HP

17. Number of days operating pump (ignore, if lifting device is manual/animal driven)

During Kharif season Days

During Rabi season Days

74

18. Average hours of pumping per day (ignore, if lifting device is manual/animal driven)

During Kharif season Hrs

During Rabi season Hrs

19. Culturable Command Area Ha.

20. Whether the scheme is located in the command of Major & Medium Schemes like Canals

etc. Code:

No --- 1 (Keep item 33 to item 37 blank)

Yes --- 2 (Keep item 26 to item 30 blank)

Yes (for augmentation only) - 3 (Keep item 21 to item 37 blank)

10. Current Status of the Scheme

SEASON WISE IRRIGATION POTENTIAL CREATED (IPC)

21. Kharif Ha.

22. Rabi Ha.

23. Perennial Ha.

24. Other Ha.

25. Total Ha.

SEASON WISE ACTUAL AREA IRRIGATED DURING 2006-07 (IPU)

26. Kharif Ha.

27. Rabi Ha.

28. Perennial Ha.

29. Other Ha.

30. Total Ha.

31. Whether the scheme is functioning well since its commissioning? (Y / N) Code:

32. If No, Maximum Potential utilised from the Scheme in any year. Ha.

75

SEASON WISE AREA IRRIGATED BY THE MINOR IRRIGATION SCHEMES

(DURING 2006-07) AS SUPPLEMENTARY SOURCE IN THE COMMAND OF

MAJOR & MEDIUM SCHEMES

33. Kharif Ha.

34. Rabi Ha.

35. Perennial Ha.

36. Other Ha.

37. Total Ha.

38. Reasons for under utilisation of schemes Code:

Non availability of adequate power – 1, Mechanical break down – 2,

Less discharge of water - 3, Storage not filled up fully - 4, Siltation of canal/storage- 5

Breakdown of channels - 6, Any other reason - 7, Not applicable - 8

39. Specific features of Reservoirs, Tank, Other storages

(a) Designed Storage (in cubic metres)

(b) Filled up Storage (during 2006-07) Code:

Full - 1, upto 3/4 - 2, upto 1/4 - 3, Nil/Negligible filled up - 4

(c) Status of filling up of storage Space Code:

(based on around 50% filling up of storages during last 5 year)

Filled up every year - 1, Usually filled up - 2, Rarely filled up - 3, Never filled up - 4

(d) Number of Villages covered by the scheme

40. Whether the Scheme has benifited Ground Water in the area Code:

Yes - 1, No - 2, Can't say – 3

Checked by: Signature of Enumerator:

Name Name

Designation: Designation:

76

ANNEXURE III

SUGGESTED REVISIONS IN THE FOURTH CENSUS OF MINOR IRRIGATION SCHEMES

Village Schedule:

Following modifications are suggested in serial number 2 of village schedule

• Is there any major/medium irrigation scheme existing in the village?

• If yes, name the scheme

• Status of the scheme (major/medium)

• Name of other villages covered under the scheme

• Source wise net irrigated area needs to be recorded under serial number 6 to 10.

• Item under serial 13 may be modified as

a) Only for irrigation

b) Only for non irrigation

c) Both for irrigation and non irrigation

Schedule – 1: Ground Water Schemes

• Information on owner of the scheme (Serial number 3) may be shifted to the

Identification part.

• Serial no. 2 may be changed to Serial no. 2 (a) and 2 (b). Serial no. 2 (a) should cover

information pertaining to type of scheme and serial no. 2 (b) should cover information

pertaining to Nature of the scheme (currently information on nature of the scheme is

covered under S. No. 7).

• Information under S. No. 6 be recorded as follows:

• Year of commissioning of the scheme:

• An item requiring information on year of disuse or failure of scheme may also be

added in the Schedule.

• Detail of the scheme (Serial No. 8): may be modified as follows

a) Depth of the Well (in meters)

(i) Dug well

(ii) Shallow tubewell

77

(iii) Deep tubewell

b) Diameter of well (in meters)

c) Diameter of bore (in milimeters) in case of shallow/deep tubewell

d) Distance from the nearest well (this item should be kept only if it is used in

analysis and presentation of results)

• Serial No. 9 may be deleted.

• Serial No. 10 major source of finance: Subsidy provided by the Government may also

be included.

• Under serial no. 15 the name of lifting machine may be added (Electric motor, Diesel

engine, Wind Mill, Solar panel, manual etc.).

• Irrigation potential created at the time of commencement of the scheme may be

added.

• If there is any revision in Irrigation potential created (increase or decrease may be

recorded along with date).

• It is better to collect information on season wise irrigation potential created (Sr. no.

22-26) in the form of crop wise, season wise target fixed for irrigation. All the crops

grown by the farmer should be covered.

• Provision be made in the Schedule for collecting information on Season wise, crop

wise actual area irrigated. All the crops grown by the farmer should be covered.

Schedule – 2: Surface Water Schemes

• Owner of the scheme (Serial number 3) may be shifted to the Identification part.

• Serial no. 2 may be changed to serial no. 2(a) and 2 (b). Serial no. 2(a) should cover

information pertaining to type of scheme and serial no. 2(b) should cover information

pertaining to Nature of the scheme (currently information on nature of the scheme is

covered under S. No. 7).

• Information under S. No. 6 be recorded as follows:

• Year of commissioning of the scheme:

• An item may be added in the Schedule containing information on year of disuse or

failure of scheme.

• Serial No. 8 may be deleted.

78

• Serial No. 9 major source of finance: Subsidy provided by the Government may also

be included.

• Under serial no. 14 the name of lifting machine may be added (Electric motor, Diesel

engine, Wind Mill, Solar panel, manual etc.).

• Irrigation potential created at the time of commencement of the scheme may be

added.

• If there is any revision in Irrigation potential created i.e. increase or decrease may be

recorded along with date.

• It is better to collect information on season wise irrigation potential created (Sr. no.

21-25) in the form of crop wise, season wise target fixed for irrigation. All the crops

grown by the farmer should be covered.

• Provision be made in the Schedule for collecting information on Season wise, crop

wise actual area irrigated. All the crops grown by the farmer should be covered.

• Serial number 39: Designed storage (in cubic meters). Experiences of field visits

reveal that it is very difficult to provide correct information in case the structure is

irregular. Part (c) status of filling up of storage (based on around 50% filling up of

storages during last 5 year): This information is also difficult to get as it is required

for 5 years. The primary workers have reported that it is difficult for the respondent to

correctly recall and provide the information. This item should be deleted from the

schedule.