Gram Panchayat|LGD 232838Water profile
Kadhirimangalam
Part of Thirupathur block, Tirupathur district.
Every household has a tap, drawn from an aquifer in deficit
All 1,688 households report a tap connection, while Tiruppattur is assessed over exploited at 141.3 percent of extraction. Service is complete; the source is not secure.
1,688 of 1,688 households, across 30 habitations.
Deep Tubewell
Tiruppattur is assessed over exploited. This describes the taluk, not this Panchayat.
31 rain days between 2026-08-02 and 2026-09-01, modelled rather than gauged.
Safe on 2026-07-18. 252 samples over 5 years, none of them recorded unsafe.
Place and boundary
The mapped extent comes from the TNGIS Panchayat polygon for this LGD code, so the place on the map is the place the records describe.
- LGD Panchayat code
- 232838
- Block
- Thirupathur
- District
- Tirupathur
- Mapped area
- 390.253 ha
- Centroid
- 12.4945, 78.5393
Habitations
JJM records service for each habitation separately. A Panchayat total can hide a habitation that is behind.
| Habitation | Population | Households | Tap connections |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alangaramangalam | 224 | 24 | 24 |
| Amman Nagar | 214 | 47 | 47 |
| Athur | 221 | 62 | 62 |
| Balamuthu Vattam | 132 | 19 | 19 |
| Boorigamanimitta | 175 | 39 | 39 |
| Boorigamanimitta Adc | 275 | 78 | 78 |
| C.k.ashramam | 390 | 101 | 101 |
| Ganakara Vattam | 161 | 25 | 25 |
| Gandhipuram | 1,103 | 123 | 123 |
| Jothi Mangalam | 672 | 120 | 120 |
| Kallumunisamyvattam | 180 | 21 | 21 |
| Kathirimangalam | 477 | 90 | 90 |
| Kulliyan Vattam | 166 | 32 | 32 |
| M.g.r.nagar | 330 | 44 | 44 |
| Makkureddy Vattam | 83 | 40 | 40 |
| Mandhirakara Vattam | 304 | 104 | 104 |
| N.m.koil | 488 | 108 | 108 |
| Nachigounder Vattam | 273 | 109 | 109 |
| Nehruji Nagar | 320 | 38 | 38 |
| Nondimariyamman Koil | 262 | 61 | 61 |
| Pattalamman Koil Vattam | 198 | 39 | 39 |
| Prakasapuram | 193 | 27 | 27 |
| Raja Gounder Vattam | 352 | 36 | 36 |
| Raja-ac | 75 | 27 | 27 |
| Samundeeswari Koil Vattam | 260 | 66 | 66 |
| Sivalingapuram | 221 | 35 | 35 |
| Subamangalam | 271 | 46 | 46 |
| Subamangalam Raman Vattam | 170 | 44 | 44 |
| Suruttaiyan Vattam | 190 | 31 | 31 |
| Vedi Vattam | 363 | 52 | 52 |
Where the water comes from
The schemes JJM records as serving this Panchayat, grouped by the kind of source they draw on.
| Source | Category | Count |
|---|---|---|
| Deep Tubewell | Ground Water | 22 |
Groundwater, projected from the taluk
IN-GRES assesses revenue taluks. This Panchayat inherits its containing taluk's category unchanged, as containing-area context rather than a measurement of the place.
Tiruppattur taluk, by centroid in taluk.
Groundwater drawn each year as a share of what recharges, for the whole taluk. Above 100 is more drawn than recharges.
Sub-district on the revenue hierarchy, which the Panchayat hierarchy does not nest inside.
The assessment unit is a revenue taluk, not the Gram Panchayat: each Panchayat inherits its containing taluk's category and stage of extraction unchanged, as containing-area context rather than a measurement of the place. Containment is decided by the TNGIS polygon centroid (vertex fallback for concave polygons); a Panchayat that falls in no taluk or in a taluk without an assessment is deferred, never guessed. 4 TNRD blocks span more than one revenue taluk, so a block-to-taluk name match would have been wrong.
Tanks and water bodies
Mapped by TNGIS and assigned to this Panchayat by the register itself, not by a name match.
2 water bodies cover 11.1 ha here, the largest of them 9.5 ha. The register names 1 of them; the names and polygons are withheld pending the TNGIS licence reply.
Waterspread is the mapped extent, not storage. It says nothing about whether these hold water through the year, whether they are encroached, or when any one of them was last surveyed.
| Registered by | Water bodies |
|---|---|
| AED | 1 |
| TNRD | 1 |
Water-quality testing
252 samples between 2022-12-30 and 2026-07-18. 124 were taken at a source and 128 at households.
None was recorded unsafe. A clean run this long describes the reporting as much as the water, so read it as an absence of recorded failures rather than as evidence of safety.
| Year | Samples |
|---|---|
| 2022 | 6 |
| 2023 | 57 |
| 2024 | 67 |
| 2025 | 65 |
| 2026 | 57 |
Land and irrigation
Census 2011, reference year 2009. A historical baseline, not current cropping.
of 585.54 ha total.
canal 0 ha, wells 98.93 ha, tanks 0 ha.
culturable waste; barren 2.01 ha, forest 0 ha.
Sources through the summer
Census 2011, reference year 2009.
6 source types were recorded for the year and 6 held through the summer months. None failed.
This is the 2009 pattern and says nothing about whether today’s piped supply holds through summer.
What is missing
15 of 40 capabilities are supported by acquired evidence. The rest are named here rather than left blank.
Nothing acquired for this district answers these, so they are named rather than estimated.
- drinking water reliability
- groundwater level observation
- groundwater level trend
- aquifer context
- catchment context
- water body condition
- waterway network
- flood hazard
- observed flood events
- natural drainage
- wastewater service
These may not be meaningful for an inland rural Panchayat. Until that is decided, they are neither claimed nor dismissed.
- surface water change
- river water quality
- engineered stormwater drainage
- wastewater treatment assets
- pollution pressure inventory
- measured water pollution
- coastal and estuarine
- current crop and irrigation state
- soil water context
- agricultural water system relation
- crop water demand
- agricultural water stress observation
- agricultural water pollution pressure
- composite priority score