Burhanpur, Madhya Pradesh

Partly Scheduled AreaCensus 2011 district code 467

Follow in a feed reader Download all proposals (CSV)

Recent activity

11 Sept 2026 · DecidedEnvironmental clearance grantedKHADKOD STONE QUARRY

Dated by the portal's own appraisal history, converted to India Standard Time; a proposal with no recorded history appears on its register submission date.

Other clearances these proposals declare

Forest land diversion declared: 0
Forest land sought for diversion: None declared
Wildlife board recommendation declared: 0
In or near a protected area: 0
In an eco-sensitive zone: 0

These counts are taken from the application forms of the 42 of 42 proposals naming this district whose forms have been read for these questions. In 11 of those forms at least one question was left blank, and a blank answer is counted as unknown. The forest area is the area stated for forest clearance, with each forest proposal counted once, in the district where its project is primarily sited.

Proposals naming this district: 42
Category A proposals: None
Families declared displaced: None declared
Families declared affected: 220

Displacement figures are the proponents’ own declarations. A project sited across several districts declares one figure for the whole project, and that figure is counted once, in the district where the project is primarily sited.

Fifth Schedule status

Partly within a Fifth Schedule Scheduled Area

This district was carved from East Nimar (Khandwa) in 2003, taking the Khaknar tribal development block the Order names. C.O. 192 fixes its area by reference to territorial divisions as existing at 20 February 2003, and a district drawn later does not change the ground the Order scheduled. The Order names part of Khandwa, and part of what it names now lies in this district, so district-level status cannot settle whether a particular site is inside it. The Ministry of Panchayati Raj lists this district among notified Fifth Schedule Areas.

OrderThe Scheduled Areas (States of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh) Order, 2003 · C.O. 192, notified 2003-02-20

What the record shows

The Scheduled Tribe share here, 30.4%, is at least double the national figure of 8.55%.
Agricultural labourers, who work other people's land for wages, make up 48% of workers here. Compensation for acquired land is paid to those who hold title to it, so it does not reach them. They can still claim the rehabilitation and resettlement entitlements of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR), because its section 3(c) counts a family whose livelihood depends on the land as an affected family, wherever that Act governs how the land is obtained.
Part of this district is a Fifth Schedule Scheduled Area. Acquiring land for a project sited in that part needs the Gram Sabha's prior consent under section 41(3) of RFCTLARR, and the district-level record cannot settle whether a particular site lies there.

Each of these observations appears when a fixed rule is met by the figures on this page, so the same figures always give the same sentences. None of them is a view on whether a project should go ahead.

Who lives there

Figures from Census 2011, each compared with the all-India value computed on the same definition.

Total population: 7,57,847
Households: 1,46,341
Average household size: 5.18; 0.33 above India's 4.85India
Scheduled Tribe share of population: 30.4%; 21.8 points above IndiaIndia
Scheduled Caste share of population: 8.5%; 8.2 points below IndiaIndia
Children aged 0-6: 16.2%; 2.6 points above IndiaIndia
Literacy rate: 64.4%; 8.6 points below IndiaIndia
Sex ratio: 951; 8.10 above India's 942.6India

What they live on

How the district's workers earn a living, from Census 2011. The land-dependent share counts cultivators and agricultural labourers as a share of all workers, and it is the group most directly affected when land is acquired.

Total workers: 3,28,339
Work participation rate: 43.3%; 3.5 points above IndiaIndia
Workers dependent on land: 68.3%; 13.7 points above IndiaIndia
Cultivators: 20.7%; 4.0 points below IndiaIndia
Agricultural labourers: 47.6%; 17.7 points above IndiaIndia
Marginal workers: 16.3%; 8.5 points below IndiaIndia
Household industry workers: 2.5%; 1.4 points below IndiaIndia

How households live

Land, income and work among rural households, from the Socio Economic and Caste Census 2011, which recorded these where the population census did not. Only the survey's rural part is used here, so urban households do not appear.

Rural households owning land: 28.3%; 17.9 points below IndiaIndia
The India figure is computed from 614 of 640 districts, because the source table has no value for the others.
Rural households whose highest earner makes over ₹5,000 a month: 17.2%; 7.1 points below IndiaIndia
The India figure is computed from 614 of 640 districts, because the source table has no value for the others.
Rural households living mainly on manual casual labour: 70.0%; 18.2 points above IndiaIndia
The India figure is computed from 614 of 640 districts, because the source table has no value for the others.
Rural households with a salaried member: 3.5%; 4.8 points below IndiaIndia
The India figure is computed from 614 of 640 districts, because the source table has no value for the others.

When these were filed

Each proposal is dated by the first step in its appraisal history, the dated record of steps the portal keeps for it.

2023-Q42026-Q3

The timeline counts 30 of the 42 proposals here. The first filing date comes from each proposal's appraisal history, and we have not yet read it for the other 12, so they are left out. Most of them are older proposals, so the early part of the timeline undercounts what was filed then. The register itself records a date for each of them; the gap is in our copy of the histories.

Hatched columns undercount, so they cannot be compared with solid ones. One of them covers a period for which we have read few filing dates so far, and it counts only the proposals whose date we have.

What kind of projects these are

The proposals naming this district, grouped by the sector each was filed under.

Non-Coal Mining 95.2%
Industrial Projects - 2 2.4%
River Valley and Hydroelectric Projects 2.4%

The four largest sectors are shown by name and the rest are grouped as Other.

What is proposed here

These are the proposals in the national environmental clearance register whose application names a site in this district, newest first. A project with sites in several districts appears under each of them.

All 42 proposals that name this district, newest first.

Showing the first 42 of 42 proposals. The rest load in the browser, and with scripting turned off they can be read from madhya-pradesh.json under /data/instruments/consent/projects/.