District|Tamil Nadu
Krishnagiri district
89% of the irrigated farmland is watered from wells (Season and Crop Report 2024-25), 3 of 8 taluks already draw more groundwater than recharges and 2 more are close to that line, and 77.9% of households are recorded with a tap, with the gap concentrated in Mathur and Kaveripattanam.
Read as of 2026-09-18, from 333 Gram Panchayats in 10 blocks, 331 of them with a brief that cleared the evidence floor.
72,953 ha net irrigated: canals 0.7%, tanks 10.2%, tube and bore wells 39.9%, open wells 49.2%, other sources 0%.
District stage of extraction 92.4%, assessed critical. Assessed per revenue taluk, not per block or Panchayat.
3,38,854 connections against 4,34,983 households in 331 Panchayats.
Type a name, a block or an LGD code; all 333 are listed. Press Enter to open the first match, or browse by block further down.
What the district runs on
Irrigation from the district tables of the Season and Crop Report 2024-25, with the Census 2011 village pattern beneath it as the block-level baseline; drinking water from the sources JJM records today. A Panchayat without a measure lowers that measure’s denominator rather than counting as a zero.
- Canals0.7%(514 ha)
- Tanks10.2%(7,405 ha)
- Tube and bore wells39.9%(29,121 ha)
- Open wells49.2%(35,913 ha)
- Other sources0.0%(0 ha)
Season and Crop Report 2024-25, Table III-B, the district total: gross 1,08,295 ha with 35,342 ha irrigated more than once (intensity 1.48).
- Canals12.4%(4,984 ha)
- Wells60.2%(24,195 ha)
- Tanks24.0%(9,646 ha)
- Other sources3.4%(1,366 ha)
Census 2011 village tables, covering 249 of 333 Panchayats with a land record. Kept beneath the current reading because it is the only served source with a block gradient.
- Ground Water97.1%(6,953)
- Surface Water2.8%(201)
- Bulk water (from MVS)0.1%(7)
- Others0.0%(1)
JJM, read 2026-09-18. Commonest source types: Deep Tubewell (6,667), Infiltration well (200), River (200), Open Well (79).
97.1% of the 7,162 drinking-water sources JJM records here draw on groundwater (6,667 of them deep tubewells), against 201 on surface water.
Groundwater by taluk
IN-GRES assesses revenue taluks, not blocks or Panchayats. These are the units the district is actually assessed in, and the headroom reading is written from them.
IN-GRES 2024-2025 puts total groundwater availability across the 8 taluks at 48,60,192 ham a year, 20,711 ham of it rainfall recharge, with 7,408 ham (0.2%) left for future use. Of the 8 taluks, 3 over-exploited, 2 critical and 3 safe. The district as a whole is assessed critical at 92.4% of extraction. Headroom sits mostly in Denkanikottai (3,432 ham) and is thinnest in Uthangarai (5 ham).
| Taluk | Stage of extraction | Category | Rainfall recharge (ham) | Total availability (ham) | Left for future use (ham) | Rainfall (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uthangarai | 148.9% | over-exploited | 2,463 | 6,97,613 | 5 | 653 |
| Bargur | 104.8% | over-exploited | 2,448 | 4,63,515 | 46 | 1084 |
| Krishnagiri | 101.2% | over-exploited | 3,832 | 8,67,325 | 874 | 861 |
| Pochampalli | 94.5% | critical | 1,674 | 5,82,948 | 410 | 835 |
| Hosur | 90.0% | critical | 2,327 | 4,15,337 | 488 | 732 |
| Shoolagiri | 69.9% | safe | 2,536 | 3,64,776 | 1,615 | 745 |
| Denkanikottai | 66.3% | safe | 4,899 | 12,45,710 | 3,432 | 784 |
| Anchetty | 35.2% | safe | 532 | 2,22,967 | 539 | 626 |
IN-GRES 2024-2025. The stage of extraction is annual draft as a share of total availability; above 100 percent, more is drawn each year than the taluk is assessed to have. Rainfall recharge is one component of that availability. The year is the hydrological-year label, not an edition date. 333 of 333 Panchayats inherit their containing taluk's category by spatial intersection, as containing-area context rather than a measurement of the place; 0 are deferred rather than guessed.
Blocks compared
The same measures per block. Where a district average hides a gradient, this is where it shows, and the findings are written before the table rather than left for the reader to find.
Canal share runs from 37.0% in Kaveripattanam to 0.0% in Kelamangalam; wells fill the difference, 67.5% of irrigated farmland at the bottom of the gradient against 43.5% at the top.
The tap gap is mostly on the blocks without canal water (Mathur (62.2% of households, 5.7% canal), Shoolagiri (72.5% of households, 8.2% canal), Thally (72.8% of households, 5.4% canal), Krishnagiri (73.2% of households, 7.2% canal), Bargur (77.1% of households, 2.9% canal), Kelamangalam (79.3% of households, 0.0% canal), Uthangarai (89.8% of households, 3.4% canal) and Veppanapalli (92.5% of households, 5.2% canal)); Kaveripattanam (67.5% of households, 37.0% canal) is the exception, with canal water and a gap.
| Drinking water, JJM | Farmland irrigation, Census 2011 | Groundwater, IN-GRES | Water bodies, TNGIS | Water-quality testing, JJM | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Block | Panchayats | Households with a tap | Irrigated area | from canals | from wells | from tanks | Taluk category, projected | Mapped | Untested 90+ d | Longest since tested |
| Bargur | 36 | 77.1% | 5,014 ha | 2.9% | 85.1% | 11.2% | over-exploited(36 of 36) | 326 | 0 | 48 d |
| Hosur | 26 | 99.8% | 2,454 ha | 12.7% | 52.6% | 33.7% | critical(26 of 26) | 1,001 | 0 | 9 d |
| Kaveripattanam | 36 | 67.5% | 8,752 ha | 37.0% | 43.5% | 18.6% | over-exploited(36 of 36) | 162 | 0 | 13 d |
| Kelamangalam | 28 | 79.3% | 1,583 ha | 0.0% | 67.5% | 31.5% | safe(28 of 28) | 351 | 0 | 11 d |
| Krishnagiri | 30 | 73.2% | 1,991 ha | 7.2% | 76.0% | 16.7% | over-exploited(30 of 30) | 194 | 0 | 11 d |
| Mathur | 24 | 62.2% | 3,845 ha | 5.7% | 52.1% | 24.2% | over-exploited(24 of 24) | 126 | 0 | 65 d |
| Shoolagiri | 42 | 72.5% | 4,196 ha | 8.2% | 71.9% | 19.0% | safe(42 of 42) | 424 | 0 | 41 d |
| Thally | 50 | 72.8% | 5,422 ha | 5.4% | 53.2% | 40.6% | safe(50 of 50) | 509 | 0 | 10 d |
| Uthangarai | 34 | 89.8% | 4,701 ha | 3.4% | 63.4% | 24.1% | over-exploited(34 of 34) | 187 | 0 | 39 d |
| Veppanapalli | 27 | 92.5% | 2,234 ha | 5.2% | 61.2% | 33.6% | over-exploited(27 of 27) | 200 | 0 | 15 d |
Canal, well and tank figures are shares of the irrigated farmland beside them, not of households and not of drinking water. They come from Census 2011 (Census 2011 release; village reference year 2009) and cover only the 249 Panchayats with a Census land record, so a block with few such records shows a share of a small area. Tap and testing figures are JJM and current at the read date. The talukcategory is the one most of the block’s Panchayats inherit by projection, since blocks and revenue taluks do not nest. Untested counts Panchayats whose most recent water-quality sample is more than 90 days before 2026-09-18; ninety days is the Atlas’s own threshold for calling a series stale, not a statutory testing interval.
Floods and scarcity
Two readings the directory families cannot carry: what the state's own disaster plan says about flood exposure here, and - where the state publishes one - the week's tanker register. Both are the state's documents, quoted and dated, not the Atlas's assessment.
Krishnagiri is not among the fourteen coastal districts the state disaster plan rates highly vulnerable; the plan does not classify inland flood exposure district by district, so that is the extent of what it states here, not a rating of safety.
“The 14 coastal Districts, viz., Chennai, Kancheepuram, Tiruvallur, Cuddalore, Villupuram, Thanjavur, Tiruvarur, Nagapattinam, Myladuthirai, Pudukottai, Ramanathapuram, Thoothukudi, Tirunelveli and Kanniyakumari are highly vulnerable and affected frequently by the trough and depression formed in the Bay of Bengal and Indian Ocean during South-West and North-East monsoon periods.”
Water bodies
The TNGIS all-water-bodies register, joined to each Panchayat by the register's own LGD code rather than by a name match.
In 324 Panchayats; 9 have none in the register. Registered by AED, DOSS, NRSC, TNRD, WRD. Waterspread is the mapped extent, not storage: it says nothing about whether these hold water through the year or when any one of them was last surveyed. Read 2026-09-18.
District Environment Plan
District Collector, Krishnagiri District (the signatory of the Conclusion), for the District Committee; published as a notice on the Krishnagiri district website prepared the plan on the CPCB model under the NGT's 2019 order. What it states about water is transcribed below, each figure with the page it sits on; nothing here is computed from it.
Dated 2019-11-22, 34 pages. Read the plan at MPCB (PDF). The Conclusion on PDF page 33 is signed 'District Collector, Krishnagiri District' with a hand-written date of 22/11/19, and the PDF's CreationDate is 22 November 2019. The district website lists it as the notice 'District Environmental protection Plan', start date 29/11/2019, under the 2019/11 upload path (2019112965.pdf). The same site holds the committee-constitution proceedings of 29.8.2019 and minutes of committee meetings held on 06.09.2019, 14.10.2019 and 11.11.2019. No later edition was found on the district, TNPCB or state environment department sites on 2026-09-18.
Transcription checked against the document on 2026-09-18.
| Figure | As stated | Where |
|---|---|---|
CPCB-identified polluted river stretches in Krishnagiri district Printed as 'no'. The same section then names two rivers that enter the district carrying Bengaluru's sewage (next figure). | 0 stretches | p. 16 (PDF p. 18) |
Rivers the plan says enter the district carrying sewage from Bangalore city Printed in words ('two'): the Cauvery (Coorg to Billikundu) and the Thenpennaiyar (Bangalore to Chokkarasanpalli, Bagalur). | 2 river stretches | p. 16 (PDF p. 18) |
Months of joint CPCB, KSPCB and TNPCB river sampling reported to the Supreme Court by July 2018 Tamil Nadu's suit O.S. No. 2/2015 against Karnataka; the Court's order of 7.7.2017 directed monthly joint sampling with CPCB as nodal agency. The plan records the case as pending. | 9 months | p. 17 (PDF p. 19) |
Length of the Thenpennaiyar in Karnataka before it enters Tamil Nadu The plan says the river enters the Tamil Nadu border carrying sewage from Bangalore city and reaches Chokkarasanapalli near Bagalur village, Hosur taluk. | 85 km | p. 17 (PDF p. 19) |
Length of the Thenpennaiyar through Krishnagiri, Dharmapuri, Tiruvannamalai, Villupuram and Cuddalore districts Printed as 'about 400 Kms'. | 400 km | p. 17 (PDF p. 19) |
Industrial effluent discharge from the district into the Cauvery and the Thenpennaiyar, as the plan states it Printed as 'no'. A statement of the plan, not a measurement. | 0 discharges | p. 17 (PDF p. 19) |
River points TNPCB samples every month Sokkarasanapalli on the Thenpennaiyar and Billikundu on the Cauvery. The count is read from the two places the sentence names. | 2 sampling points | p. 18 (PDF p. 20) |
Effluent treatment plants required in industries (Red, Orange and 17-category) Table cell in the Plan of Action column. | 738 ETPs | p. 22 (PDF p. 24) |
Effluent treatment plants provided in industries (Red, Orange and 17-category) Table cell in the Plan of Action column. | 738 ETPs | p. 22 (PDF p. 24) |
Sewage treatment plants required for the local bodies Table cell; the plan does not name the local bodies or print a capacity. | 2 STPs | p. 22 (PDF p. 24) |
Sewage treatment plants provided in the local bodies Table cell; no capacity is printed. A photograph on PDF page 26 is captioned 'UGSS-STP by Krishnagiri Municipality'. | 1 STPs | p. 22 (PDF p. 24) |
Solid waste generated in the district Printed as 'around 108.68 Tons/Day'; one district total, no break-up by local body. | 108.68 tonnes per day | p. 5 (PDF p. 7) |
Average rainfall From the introduction's district profile. | 830 mm per year | p. 1 (PDF p. 3) |
Action points the plan sets for water: the district collector, krishnagiri district has instructed the commissioners municipalities, town panchayats, panchayas union and pwd to prepare the dpr for interception and diversion (i & d) of sewage & sullage, carrying drains to the nearby sewage treatment plant (stp).; identification of cities, towns and villages discharging sewage through drains into river/tributary and their quantification and characterization of pollution load.; identification of gap between sewage generation and treatment capacities and installing additional stps and sewerage system where ever needed.; execution of stp works and necessary infrastructure and ensuring household sewer connection (ugds) for full utilization of stp.; inventorisation of water polluting industries near to the river stretch.; monthly sample collection along the river stretch and analyzing the samples. displaying of report of analysis (roa) in the official website.; periodic assessment and remediation of sub-surface flow and ground water quality in the nearby river.; effective implementation of rain water harvesting and ground water recharging.; identification & demarcation of encroachments along the river beds.; functional status of etps/stps/cetps.; quantification of sewage in each of the local bodies.; number and capacity of stp provided in each of the local bodies.; treat sewage from the common stps shall be utilised for industrial use, agriculture, ground water recharge and other non domestic use.; collection of historical, geographical and geological data for all the water bodies.; declaring the designated best use of water bodies and ascertain the quality of water as per the standard.; deweeding, desilting, protection of drainage basin, channels, stabilization of earthen bunds and preparing cost estimation.; removal of encroachments and blockades, deciding on flood control measures and preparing cost estimation.. Two things to know when reading the PDF: PDF page = printed page + 2: the cover and the index are unnumbered, and the introduction starts at printed page 1 on PDF page 3. PDF page 33 (printed 31: the end of the sand-mining table, the Conclusion and the Collector's signature) is a camera scan whose text layer holds only 'Scanned by CamScanner'; it was read from the page image. It carries no figures. The four treatment-plant counts on PDF page 24 sit in the middle column of a three-column table. A whole-page text extraction interleaves the neighbouring 'Responsibilities' column into those lines ('required in TNPCB/ Industries.'), so their quotes are the cell text as extracted from that column alone (pdftotext -r 72 -x 248 -y 290 -W 200 -H 215 on page 24). The plan counts the urban local bodies two ways: the introduction (PDF page 3) says 'one Corporation namely Hosur, one Municipality namely Krishnagiri, 6 Town Panchayats and 10 PanchayatUnions', while the solid-waste section (PDF page 7) says '2 Municipalities, 6 Town Panchayats and 10 Panchayat unions'. Neither is transcribed as a figure. The section headed 'VI. Rejuvenation of Polluted River Stretches' states that CPCB has identified no polluted stretch in the district and, in the next sentence, that the Cauvery and the Thenpennaiyar enter the district carrying sewage from Bangalore city. Both statements are transcribed as printed. Place names vary within the document and are kept as printed in each quote: Billikundu, Billigundu and Biligundu; Sokkarasanapalli, Chokkarasanpalli and Chokkarasanapalli; Thenpennaiyar and Thenpennaiar; Arikavathi for the Arkavathi. The index prints the section title 'Polluted Industrial Cluster' and the section heading prints 'Pollution Industrial Clusters'.
Polluted river stretches
What CPCB's October 2025 (updated version) report lists for the district. Priority is CPCB's own BOD band on the 2022 and 2023 maximum, I the worst; station BOD for 2024 is the report's follow-up annexure. Each row says how it was joined to the district: a place CPCB prints, or the river's course.
Find a Gram Panchayat
Every one of the 333 LGD-coded Gram Panchayats is listed. A place shows a water profile only where its evidence cleared the floor (identity, population and drinking-water service established); the rest are directory records, kept so they can be found and reviewed.
333 Gram Panchayats. 331 water profile, 2 directory record.
| A.Settipalli | Shoolagiri | 224960 | Water profile |
| Achamangalam | Bargur | 224780 | Water profile |
| Achettipalli | Hosur | 224816 | Water profile |
| Achubalu | Thally | 225002 | Water profile |
| Agalakotta | Thally | 225003 | Water profile |
| Agaram | Kaveripattanam | 224842 | Water profile |
| Agasipalli | Krishnagiri | 224907 | Water profile |
| Alapatti | Krishnagiri | 224908 | Water profile |
| Alasapalli Batvarapalli | Hosur | 224817 | Water profile |
| Alur | Shoolagiri | 224961 | Water profile |
| Anandur | Mathur | 224936 | Water profile |
| Anchetti | Thally | 225004 | Water profile |
| Anchoor | Bargur | 224781 | Water profile |
| Andevanapalli | Thally | 225005 | Water profile |
| Anekollu | Kelamangalam | 224878 | Water profile |
| Angondapalli | Shoolagiri | 224962 | Water profile |
| Anniyalam | Thally | 225006 | Water profile |
| Antheripatti | Mathur | 224937 | Water profile |
| Arasakuppam | Thally | 225007 | Water profile |
| Arasampatti | Kaveripattanam | 224843 | Water profile |
| Athimugam | Shoolagiri | 224963 | Water profile |
| Athipadi | Uthangarai | 225052 | Water profile |
| Avathavadi | Kaveripattanam | 224844 | Water profile |
| Ayaranapalli | Shoolagiri | 224964 | Water profile |
| B.Kurubarapalli | Shoolagiri | 224983 | Water profile |
| B.S.Thimmasandiram | Shoolagiri | 224989 | Water profile |
| Badapalli | Uthangarai | 225053 | Water profile |
| Baduthepalli | Hosur | 224818 | Water profile |
| Bagaloor | Hosur | 224819 | Water profile |
| Bairamangalam | Kelamangalam | 224879 | Water profile |
| Baiyanapalli | Krishnagiri | 224913 | Water profile |
| Balanapalli | Veppanapalli | 225087 | Water profile |
| Baleguli | Kaveripattanam | 224847 | Water profile |
| Balethottam | Bargur | 224785 | Water profile |
| Baliganapalli | Hosur | 224820 | Water profile |
| Balinayanapalli | Bargur | 224782 | Water profile |
| Ballapalli | Thally | 225009 | Water profile |
| Bandaseemanoor | Bargur | 224783 | Water profile |
| Banganahalli | Shoolagiri | 224965 | Water profile |
| Bannihalli | Kaveripattanam | 224845 | Water profile |
The district on a map
Every Panchayat with a mapped boundary is plotted from the centre of its own TNGIS polygon, not from a hand-entered coordinate. The marker is the Panchayat, not a settlement.
Rivers, groundwater and industry on one map
333 of 333 Panchayats have a mapped boundary. The polygons are not drawn on this page; the district map linked above draws the Panchayat boundaries.
How current these figures are
Not everything on this page is from the same year, and the gap is large. What each figure describes is listed separately from when the Atlas last read it, straight from each artifact's own record.
| Figures | Describes | Last read | Produced | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Panchayat list and codes | 2021-03-11 (PDF CreationDate) | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | TNRD LGD directory, cross-checked against the current TNRD master on the retrieval date. |
| Drinking-water service, sources, testing | current at 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | Jal Jeevan Mission citizen corner: habitations, tap connections, sources, sample rows. |
| Irrigation by source, district | Season and Crop Report 2024-25 | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | DES Season and Crop Report Table III-B: net area irrigated per source at district grain. The block gradient below stays Census 2011 until a taluk-grain source is wired. |
| Land, irrigation and seasonal sources | Census 2011 release; village reference year 2009 | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | Census 2011 village tables, the newest village-level irrigation enumeration served here. The Season and Crop Report district mix above is the current reading; the 2017-18 Minor Irrigation Census (wells and tanks by village) is not wired yet. |
| Groundwater assessment | 2024-2025 | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | IN-GRES, assessed per revenue taluk. The year is the hydrological-year label. |
| Groundwater projected to Panchayats | 2024-2025 | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | Each Panchayat inherits its containing taluk's category by spatial intersection. |
| Rainfall | 2026-08-19 to 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | Open-Meteo reanalysis at a grid point inside each Panchayat, not a gauge. |
| Water bodies | as mapped; the register carries no survey date | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | TNGIS all-water-bodies register, counts and areas only. |
| Panchayat briefs | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | Generated from the families above; a place without identity, population and service stays directory-only. |
| District Environment Plan | 2019 plan, dated 2019-11-22 | 2026-09-18 | 2026-09-18 | Transcribed from the published PDF with the page each figure sits on; nothing computed from it. |
| Flood classification | Tamil Nadu State Disaster Management Plan 2023, 2023-03-18 | 2026-09-02 | 2026-09-02 | The plan's own flood classification, quoted with its page; the Atlas classifies nothing itself. A revised plan replaces this line wholesale. |
The land, irrigation and seasonal-source figures are the oldest thing here by a wide margin. India’s 2021 census did not take place, so Census 2011 remains the most recent village-level enumeration and there is no newer source of the same granularity to replace it with. Those figures are kept under capabilities named historical, and the current-crop capability is left empty rather than answered with a 2009 number.