CHAPTER 5

Socio-economic characteristics of Pune Cantonment's

Population

5.1 Introduction
Geographers, sociologists and planners have made serious attempts to
develope techniques for describing systematically the measurable spatial
patterns of urban population, as well as their underlying social dimensions.
The techniques used are concerned with the ecological and demographic
structure of the urban population as a whole, as well as with the meaningful
characterization of different types of area in precise quantitative forms. The
beginning of this approach was seen in the works of plant ecologists at the
University of Chicago. These projects inspired a large number of studies by
sociologists and urban geographers.

5.2 Factorial ecology: An Overview

Currently, the approach most frequently used for deriving the ecological
structure of a city which is the product of social, economical and
locational characteristics of its inhabitants and their activities, is the
factorial ecology approach. It is assumed here that the residence of
population has a tendency to group into specific andrelativelyhomogenous
units which are segregated, primarily not only on an economic basis, but
also according to language race and culture.

98
Initial observations, on informal basis of Chicago revealed that the process
of upward and social mobility involved geographic migration: the
population group which resided in the city for the longest time would move
from their original homes to newer homes in the city's periphery as their
economic status improved; they would be replaced at the centre of the city
by new arrivals. Thus, a distinctive spatial pattern of activity and residence
zones emerged due to the process of radial expansion of the city which was
further expressed in terms of idealized 'concentric zone' model as
formulated by Burgess (1960). The model though crude and unrefined, has
nonetheless provided a set of ideas about urban spatial structure and
provided a general frame-work for the more detailed studies in 'natural
areas' within the city.
The limitations of time and space inherent in the applicability of Burgess'
concentric zone model have inspired several cross cultural studies and
alternative models for example, Hoyt's (1939), sector model, Harris and
Ullman's (1957), "multi-nuclei" model and Mann's (1965),model for the
British city. Non-western cities were not extensively studied except by
Mc.Gee (1967), who suggested a model for the south-east Asian cities.
However, best known contribution on urban ecology based on 'social area
analysis' is by Shevky and Bell (1949) and 'cluster analysis' by Tryon
(1955). An overall view of the development of social area analysis and its
typology is given in 5:1 and 5:2.

99
Diagram 5:1 Social area analysis (strictly defined)
Shevky and Williams Shevky and Bell

criticism /
Hawley and Duncan; Duncan

/
Continuing applications Tests of social area Cluster Analysis
of Social Area Analysis construct using of socio-economic
strictly defined e.g. Factor analysis data for census
Herbert; Mc Elarth Bell;Val Arsdol tracts
Camilleri and Tryon
Schmid

Factor analysis of
Socio-economic
data of census tracts
deriving basic dimensions
which are compared with
available theory.
Schmid and Tagashira
Sweetser, Goheen,
Murdie, Pederson, Berry,
Abu Lughod

Diagram 5:2 Typology of social area analysis

Social Area Analysis (broadly defined)

Type Social Area Factor Analysis Factorial

Analysis of Social Areas Ecology
strictly defined
variables

Method Construction Factor analysis Factor analysis

Employed of Shevky Bell of Shevky Bell of socio-economic
indices index variables variables,
including the
Shevky Bell set

Source: Philip H Rees, The Factorial Ecology of Metropolitan Chicago, Master's thesis,
University of Chicago, 1968.

100
 Study of urban phenomenon in the Indian subcontinent has suffered from
unreality by forcing descriptions into frames that do not apply and by
carrying out exercises quite inappropriate to Indian urbanism. The first
ecological commentary on an Indian city in which the classical models are
questioned, is that of Gist (1957), "The ecology of Banglore, India: an East-
West comparison".
The term 'social area analysis' applies to only that mode of analysis
outlined by Eshref Shevky, Mariaane Williams and Wendell Bell in their
studies of Los Angeles and San Fransisco (1949). From a number of
postulates concerning industrial society they derived three basic constructs:
Social Rank by Shevky (and economic status by Bell), Urbanization (family
status) and Segregation (Ethnic status). With the help of these three
constructs, they classified the census tracts into social areas based upon
their scores on the indices.
Amos Hawley and Otis D. Duncan (1957), in their Review of Social Area
Analysis by Shevky and Bell criticized the theory underlying the constructs
on theoretical grounds and for empirical reasons i.e., the method of
dimensioning the constructs. In an effort to meet the empirical objectives
that the measures employed assumed the constructs to be correct but failed
to provide a test of their validity. Bell used factor analysis to show that in
both, Los Angeles and San Francisco, the census measures used, formed a
structure consistent with Shevky's formulations.
Van Arsdol, Camilleri and Schmid (1958), extended Bell's test of Shevky's
model to ten cities, six of which confirmed Shevky's indices while the other
four cities did not confirm their validity. This suggested that many more

101
variables dealing with the soico-economic characteristics of population
should be included in the study and factor analysis, should be used to
isolate the fundamental patterns of variations in the data.
Mc Elarth and Barkey (1960), performed a social area analysis of the
Chicago Metropolitan area in which the spatial patterns were displayed by
composite social area indices with respect to the classic ecological models
and were examined through an analysis of variance.
Berry and Tennant (1965), in order to provide a socio-economic framework
within the commercial structure of the north-eastern Illinois Metropolitan
Area, used 50 variables and 147 municipalities with populations exceeding
2,500.
Pederson's study of Copenhagen (1967), is one of the most comprehensive
urban ecological analysis. He used 14 socio-economic variables related to
age distribution, employment status, industry in which employed,
household size, sex ratio and female employment From these, three basic
factors emerged, which were: urbanization or family status, socio-economic
status, population growth and mobility-
Frank L Sweetser (1968), considered the influence of the boundaries of the
study area on the factorial ecologies that emerged in his studies of Boston
and Helsinki. He divided his study area into concentric rings and sectors
and performed separate factor analysis for each ring and sector.
Unfortunately, he failed to relate the similarities and differences of the
factor structures in various zones of the metropolis.
Schmid and Tagashira (1964), suggested that a smaller set of variables,
carefully selected will essentially reproduce the principal factors extracted

102
from a much larger set, which is a labour saving device. Tryon (1955),
proposed 'cluster analysis' as an alternative to factor analysis. However,
both 'social area analysis' as well as 'cluster analysis' as techniques, have
been subjected to criticism with reference to their theory, methodology and
utility.
A principal conclusion of Abu Lughod's study of Cairo was that "no
factorial separations between indicators of social rank and the indicators of
family cycle stage could be obtained". This contrasts with normal two sets
of indicators in factor analysis of American city data matrix. As a result,
Abu Lughod had to outline in an extremely effective way, the conditions
that were necessary and sufficient to produce the dimensions of socio-
economic status and family status that have been found to have an
independent existence in almost all American cities, conditions that were
not fulfilled in case of Cairo.

5.3 Studies on urban ecology in India

After having reviewed the works of Western scholars, the study of urban
phenomena in the Indian subcontinent needs to be reviewed. Most studies
on Indian cities, particularly by Indian scientists have suffered from
unreality by forcing descriptions into frames that do not apply and by
carrying out exercises which are quite irrelevant to Indian urbanism [Rao
and Tiwari, (1979)]
The first ecological commentary on an Indian city in which the classical
models are questioned is that of Gist (1957). In his study he has compared
the ecological patterning of business, industry, public institutions,

103
residential segregation, decentralization and slums in Bangalore city to the
generalized patterns of these variables in the cities in Latin America carried
out by Caplow&Hayner(1949).
The urban development in India has evolved under the impact of both the
indigenous as well as colonial traditions and has given rise to a dualism in
the city structure. This is evident from highly mixed land use, sharp
density ratios between the older areas and the periphery and the differences
in life styles and social organization of the population [ Breese (1966)
Smailes (1969), Mc.Gee (1971).]
A preliminary analysis of the structure of Indian cities carried out by
examining its constituent elements as they occur in distinctive association
was done by Arthur E Smailes (1969). He has drawn attention to the
special significance of towns as expressions of imperial expansion and
intrusion of conquerors, who seek security in urban concentration and their
urban character also reflects their role as administrators, traders or military
pensioners in contradiction to indigenous peasantry. [Smailes (1953).]
When discussing structural patterns within an Indian city, it has become a
ritual to echo the Western models, even though Hoyt's sector model and
Harris and Ullman's multiple nuclei model- are misfits. Assumptions and
theories about the city structure tend to be centre bound. Unfortunately the
generalizations derivedfromthe study of western cities have been treated as
being universally valid. To counteract these false notions attention has
been drawn by Sjoberg (1960), to the basic differences between the pre-
industrial cities all over the world and modern Western civilization.

104
Wheatley (1967), has emphasized the importance of 'ethno-centre' as the
genesis of urban settlement.
Berry and Rees (1969), made an attempt to extend cross-cultural research in
urban ecology using the case study of Calcutta city. The purpose of this
study was to examine the extent to which the archetypal 'premature
metropolis' was modernizing in socio-geographic sense. The social
structure, the geographical distribution of landuse and the population of
Calcutta was compared to the classic models with the implicit
understanding that the degree of fit between the models and reality is an
indicator of modernity.
Berry and Spodek (1971), in their paper on co-operative ecologies of large
Indian cities like Ahmedabad, Bombay, Kanpur, Madras, Poona and
Sholapur opine that the socio-economic dimension is the most dominant
factor responsible for residential segregation . According to them the
prevailing spatial patterns are that of high status neighborhoods in the core
and low-status neighborhood at the periphery - substantiating Sjoberg's
generalization about the pre-industrial city.
Weinstien (1978), in his study of Madras analysed its urban ecological
structure and made use of census data as well as the information gathered
from a large scale house-hold survey. He concludes that concentric zones
as well assume sectoral and multiple nuclei models describe the actual
structure of Madras no better than chance alone. At the same time the
analysis of this survey data provided strong support for the earlier
contentions that social - rank mixed however, with 'discrepant'

105
characteristics such as presence of houseless population - does dominate
ecological structure in the city.
Another of Weinstein's study on the Ahmedabad city (1979), deals with
the blend of modernism and conventionalism in the ecological structure of
this city. He has made use of historical, observational, census and survey
data to submit his proposition - that the ecological structure of Indian cities
is 'converging on the model of the industrial metropolis' to a relatively
exact test.
The analysis of the changes in the geographical pattern of growth in
Bombay and Delhi has been done by Brush (1970). He found that there
exist are inner zones of old upper class concentration and outer sectors of
recent upper-class expansion in both cities. According to him, the urban
population reflects traditional preference of the elite to central locations
while recent peripheral growth parallel to the pattern of Western cities is
also seen.
Rao and Tiwari (1979), in their analysis of the ecological structure of the
Bangalore city find that the city structure is not a stereotyped 'rich centre
and poor periphery model but a complex one with middle class centres and
both high status and low status periphery.'
The factorial ecology studies of Hyderabad (1966) revealed that the areas
of lowest social rank formed a periphery in the city's industrial zones,
whereas the areas of the high social rank were found in the economic core
of the city.
Meera Kosambi (1980), in her study on urban functions, spatial patterns
and ethnic composition of Bombay and Poona views both these cities from

106
the urban sociological perspective. According to her, Bombay and Poona
belong to two distinct and recognised city types namely the colonial port
city and the indigenous capital city. The focus of her study is of the urban
functions and locational factors responsible for the growth of these two
cities - one of foreign and other of indigenous origin and the influence of
these factors on their spatial patterns and ethnic composition
S. K. Mehta (1968), in his initial study on patterns of residence in Poona:
by income, education and occupation, analyses the residential pattern of
socio-economic groups in Poona, and shows that social patterns have
largely remained unchanged over a span of thirty years (1937-65).
According to him there is a graded hierarchy in the extent of residential
dissimilarity as one moves up the socio-economic ladder and segregation is
greatest for the highest and the lowest social groups. So also the extent of
low rent areas is negatively associated with status.
In his subsequent study (1969), on the patterns of residence in Pune by
caste and religion during the period 1822-1965, he analyses the residential
distribution of caste and religious groups in Poona over the past 150 years .
His study reveals that distinctive patterns of segregation and centralization
have largely remained constant, despite the city's growth and development.
Vrishali Deosthali, (1986), in her paper, "Regionalisation of an urban area-
an ecological approach : A case study of Pune city", attempts to assess the
relationship between various morphological parameters which represent the
housing conditions of Pune. Similarly the socio-economic and
demographic status of the households in Pune have also been incorporated
in the analysis. She opines that a city is not merely an assemblage of

107
buildings made up of bricks and mortar, but it is a human phenomenon and
feels that the planned housing development of a city should be based on its
regionalization which helps in identification of problems within an urban
area.

5.4 Pane Cantonment's Social Structure: Approaches

The data on Pune city, on the basis of which earlier ecological studies were
carried out by S.K. Mehta (1968) and (1969) or Breese (1969), etc. is
unusually rich, both in quantity and time. Materials were available from
the records of Maratha administration which dates back to 1822 and from
surveys of 1937 and the re-survey of 1954 by Gadgil and Sovani
respectively, at the Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, Pune. The
data facilitated the examination of materials on the size of the city, its
density, the external connections with the other cities, the economic
functions of Pune and the social areas of Pune over time.
Thus, the present study will have the benefit of having recorded data
pertaining to long span of time, which makes it possible to have a spatio-
temporal perspective. In the present study of the socio-economic dimension
of Pune city and its Cantonments, it was thought prudent to apply the
factorial ecology approach, which leans heavily on both: the primary and
secondary sources of data. The secondary sources of data include the
Gazetteers of Bombay Presidency, especially Poona District Gazetteer and
Poona- A socio-economic survey Part I and II by Gadgil (1937) and
Resurvey by Sovani (1954). For the latest information on the social

108
structure of the Cantonments the Electoral Role for 1996 published for the
seven wards proved beneficial. In all 79 variables derived from the
questionnaire schedule, for each of the 111 wards of Pune city plus 14
wards of Pune and Kirkee Cantonments were used. (The definitions of each
variable is given in Appendix 1). All these wards were organized under 12
major sets of variables : i) population, ii) sex, iii) age, iv) caste, v)
religion vi) migration vii) family size viii) education, ix) employment x)
socio-economic status xi) housing and xii) mobility.
The data generated through the administration of questionnaire schedule
(Appendix II) helped to derive a comprehensive picture of the social areas
of Pune City and the two Cantonments, thereby facilitating comparison. To
further test the authenticity of the factorial ecology approach, an empirical
method was employed based on actual field work in the seven wards of the
Pune Cantonment.

5.5 Methodology
In view of the complex structures existing in Indian cities, with such
immense diversity of language, caste, religion and ethnic groups, deriving
social areas of Pune Cantonment and Pune city was no simple task. But at
the same time it was also interesting to find out, whether cities whose
economic base was driven by industry followed the same spatial pattern as
those obtained in the West. It is with this intention that the factorial
ecology approach has been used in the present study. It is also important to
identify whether the factorial approach is sensitive enough to bring out the
basic duality in the social structure of the old city of indigenous origin and

109
the Pune Cantonment which is the product of Colonial Rule on the Indian
sub-continent. Therefore, in the present context, apart from testing the
validity of the factorial ecology model to cities in the Third World and the
peculiar deviations from its basic features, what is more relevant is whether
the two distinct socio-economic areas are revealed by using the factorial
ecology approach. The other important questions which may arise from
this centre round are: i) Is the model totally inadequate to explain the
ground reality, existing in the trajectory followed by Indian urbanization?
ii) What are the deviations from the general theory? iii) Can a suitable
model depicting Indian reality be formulated by modifying some of the
variables used in the factorial approach to suit the Indian situations?
In case of Pune city, the spatial unit for observation was the ward, an
electoral unit at the local self government derived on basis of population
size. Pune city, Kirkee Cantonment and Pune Cantonment together were
divided into 125 wards. A correlation matrix of 79 variables was used as a
first step. This correlation matrix was subjected to multiple-stage factor
analysis which helped to segregate 18 variables that loaded highly on 4
factors i.e., socio-economic factor, ethnic factor, slum factor and age-
structure factor. Those variables which loaded on factors which were not
interpretable were eliminated. Table 5:1
In order to be assured that reliable factors emerge from factor analysis, also
known as principal component analysis, the sample size for ward was
chosen to be 100. This helped the study to determine the factors which
underlie a group of variables.

110
As the primary concern of factor analysis was to describe the variation or
variance which is shared by scores of people on the set of variables, it is
assumed that the test used to examine the total variance also known as
communality variesfrom0 to 1.
In factor analysis, the first principal axis which is extracted, accounts for
the largest amount of variance shared by the tests. The second factor
consists of the largest amount of variance which is not related to or
explained by the first factor. Thus these two factors are orthogonal i.e.,
unrelated to first two factors. Thus, though there are as many factors as
variables, the degree of variance which is explained by successive factors
becomes smaller and smaller and as such only the first few factors are
important. Table 5:2, which is the SPSS output shows that the initial factor
analysis and the amount of variance they account for i.e., their eigen
values. Thus for example, the proportion of variance due to first factor is
about 6.07056 or 33.7 percent, second factor 3.23677 or 18.0 percent, on
similar lines 13.5 percent and 7.3 percent for the third factor and fourth
factor respectively. Having done this, the next step was to decide how
many factors were to be retained for final analysis and this was done
according to Kaiser's criterion i.e., only those factors which have an eigen
value of greater than 1 were selected.
As shown in Table 5:2, only first four factors are considered. The last
column of the table is of cumulative percentage, which indicates the
percentage of variance attributable to the factor. As the table indicates,
almost 72.5 percent is attributable to the first four factors and hence only
these have been considered for the factor analysis. With the help of these

111
four factors, factor transformation Matrix was prepared(Tab!e 5:3) and
finally the Factor Coefficient Matrix (Table 5:4)
Finally, ward-wise distribution of factor scores was done (Table 5:5) and
with the help of cluster analysis seven clusters were formed. (Table 5:6 and
(Table 5:7), inorder to identify the underlying latent groups. The cluster
analysis thus permitted us to allocate the wards to specific categories in the
seven cluster solution. (Table 5:8)

5.6 Distribution of Factor Scores

The wardwise distribution of Factor scores are given in Table 5:5
Factor 1: Socio-Economic Status
The variables which denote the socio-economic status (Factor 1)
load high on the variables such as 'category 2 equipments' (variable 4,
loading .793), 'males having higher education' (variable 11, loading
.66875), ownership of two wheelers (variable 17, loading .713). (Table 5:2)
The scores of all the 125 wards of Pune city and both the Cantonments, are
mapped on the scale of socio-economic status Fig. 5:1, employing 5
roughly equal-sized classes. The highest positive scores are found in the
areas which are relatively newly developed, such as western peripheral
region of Aundh and Pashan, Shivaji Nagar, Jangli Maharaj Road, S.P.
College, Tilak Road and outer parts of old suburb of Pune city, parts of
Ghorpadi, Gultekdi and Salisbury Park in the south, the area between
Hadapsar and Hadapsar Gaothan in the south-east and the western part of
Lohagaon and eastern part of Yerwada in the north east of the city.

112
 Factor 1

below -0.7

-0.7 to -0.3
Pune Municipal Corporation
"X ;| -0.3 to 0.3
125 Wards-1993
0.3 to 0.7 •
•»———. Cantonments

0.7 and above •*•*••- — Pune Municipal Corporation

Fig. 5:1 Factor I Socio-economic Status

A significant percentage of the population residing in these areas score high
on Factor 1 and belong to high income group. They have equipment like
colour television sets, vedio cassette recorders, refrigerators, gas two
wheelers and own a house or flat. They have independent toilet facilities,
seperate latrines with septic tanks and independent water supply. The high
socio-economic status in these wards could be attributed to the fact that,
Pune city acquired a special character due to industrial development in the
peripheral suburbs. This generated a centrifugal pull and dominance in the
periphery and factors such as high concentration of jobs, financial
insitituions, shopping areas of high order, transport facilities, hospitals,
recreation centres - all contributed to turn city inside out. Many of the
managerial and technical elite who have recently shifted to Pune also reside
here. Aundh Road, Gymkhana, area around Vaikunth cemetry, Gultekdi,
Prabhat Road, Mitramandal, Bund Garden, Lullanagar, Koregaon Park are
the calm and well planned parts of the city with spacious bungalows and
luxury flats. Thus the periphery is characterised by higher level of housing
and living conditions than in the core and intertmextiary zones.

Factor 2 : Ethnic Factor

The second factor to emerge from the analysis isolated the religion,
language and caste i.e., the Ethnic Factor. The variables that loaded very
high were 'religion Hindu' (variable 15, loading .86825), 'upper caste'
(variable 18 loading .87912), 'mother tongue other than Marathi' (variable
12, loading .66875).

113
The east-west differentiation of the city is very clear in terms of social
composition of population in the two parts. The west has a very high
percentage of native Brahmins and the east has a high percentage of
Christians, Muslims, Scheduled castes and Depressed classes and other
trader classes like Parsi, Gujarati, Marwadi, etc. The upper-caste Hindu
seem to follow a centralized pattern in the old core of Pune city, while the
scheduled caste and depressed classes show a generalised pattern of
segregation. Religion-wise as well as the upper-caste Hindus are
concentrated in the older western parts of the city, while the Muslims are
concentrated in the east and in the core of the city and the Christians in the
east and in the intermediate zones. In Pune Cantonment, with its unique
social, economic and political structures, the segregation patterns of non-
Hindu religious groups are crystallized - for example, the Parsis and the
Christians are drawn in their choice of residential location to the
Cantonment or the adjoining areas of Pune city, near the Cantonment.
The majority of Christians and the Parsis have their employment places of
residence, places of business, education and worship in Pune Cantonment.
The scores of the various wards of Pune and both the Cantonments are
mapped in Fig. 5:2. The highest positive scores are to be found in the
areas which are in the western wards and in the core area of Pune city,
while the eastern wards have negative scores which are indicative of mixed
social composition in terms of caste, religion and language.

114
 hi
Factor 2

.. 4 t.

i:v:-':;.,-i.^i;5i:'|-:i',a"-i"--. • •
lgp>

below -0.7

-0.7 to -0.3

-0.3 to 0.3
Pune Municipal Corporation
125 Wards-1993
0.3 to 0.7
Canionmenls *
0.7 and above •»——— Pune Municipal Corporation

Fig. 5:2 Factor II Ethnicity

Factor 3 : Slum Factor
The wards which score highly on slum factor conversely score very low on
the socio-economic factor (Factor 1). The variables which indicate the
slum factor load highly on variables such as 'open drainage' (variable 2,
loading .84126), 'low level of education' (variable 6, loading .75115 ) and
'people living in huts', (variable 8, loading .72112). The scores of various
wards of Pune and the two Cantonments mapped oh the scale of slum factor
show that the scheduled caste and slum population show a generalised
pattern of segregation and association in space. They also show interrupted
zonal patterns and are in intermediate peripheral zones. These wards have a
high percentage of population who have poor socio-economic status and
they are the suburbs of kachha houses and huts without an approved plan
and basic amenities like water, sanitation with open drainage system and
common water supply and common laterines.
Some of the wards which score high on the slum factor are located in the
eastern half of the city core, they are Bhavani Peth, Ghorpade Peth, Nana
Peth while the other wards are in the suburban extension, south-west, south
and north-east i.e., Hingne, Parvati Jalkumbh, Dhankavadi, Yerwada,
Pashan, Aundh Gaon, Hadapsar, Kasturba Smarak, Vikas Nagar,
Maldhakka, Yerwada Gaothan, Lohiya Nagar, Rajendra Nagar, Timber
Market, Sattoti Haud and Dapodi. These areas show the characteristics of
slum areas which are the result of successive waves of inmigrants settled in
the congested areas near the city.

115
 Factor 3

below -0.7

m$ -0.7 to -0.3
Pune Municipal Corporation
-0.3 to 0.3
til 0.3 to 0.7
125 Wards-1993
Cantonments •
0.7 and above — — Pune Municipal Corporation

Fig. 5:3 Factor III Slums

Factor 4 : Age-Structure Factor
The areas in which the proportion of young people is relatively higher have
been mapped in Fig. 5:4 on the scale of age-structure factor, employing five
roughly equally-sized classes. The variables which denote this factor have
high loadings on variables such as, 'high percentage of children' (variable
14, loading .94310), 'common water supply' (variable 1, loading .94629),
'category 1 equipments' (variable 5, loading .7447). All these variables
show the characteristics of household as young and poor families staying in
rented houses. The area includes the parts of western half of the old core
where reconstruction of old wadas and chawls is a slow process. Since the
structures are old, the rents are low, making it affordable to young
inmigrants who come to Pune for employment in the industrial estates or
for business opportunities. The scores on Factor 4 indicate the low socio-
economic status of the households, who are young poor tenants with more
than two children. As the industrial development in Pune is an on going
process since last forty years, mostly in the outer fringes of the city and
the industrial estates have been established along high ways and the
railways radiating from it, the fringe wards have a high percentage of
population of young households. It includes Bopodi, Dapodi, Northern
Shivaji Nagar, and areas which are located to the north of River Mula
Mufha. These areas have also developed near and around the railway tracks
and accommodate the young population, commuting factory workers and
those employed in the railways.

116
)r
Factor 4

below -0.7

-0.7 to -0.3

-0.3 to 0.3
Pune Municipal Corporation
125 Wards-1993
0.3 to 0.7
Cantonmenls
0.7 and above "•—•••" Pune Municipal Corporation

Fig. 5:4 Factor IV Age Structure

 A comparison of maps of ethnic factor- (Factor 2) and age structure
factor (Factor 2) i.e., Fig. 5:2 and Fig. 5:4 reveal that the areas which score
high on factor 2 more or less correspond to the areas of factor 4 . While
the comparison of maps of socio-economic factor (Factor 1) and slum factor
(Factor 3) Fig. 5:1 and Fig.5:3 respectively reveals that within the city,
areas that score high on Factor 1 score low on Factor 3 and conversely
areas that score high on Factor 3 score low on Factor 1.

5.7 Areas Derived from Seven Cluster Solution : An analysis.

Taking into account the socio-economic and demographic aspects of the
population, specific clusters of wards were formed with the help of cluster
analysis. A 'seven cluster solution', derived using cluster analysis, helped
in identifying latent groups which led to allocate all 125 wards to specific
clusters. Table 5:9

Cluster: 1
In this cluster the scores on Factor I and Factor II are moderately negative (-
.4237) and (-.3729) respectively and the score on Factor HI is very high
(2.0064). Thus, this cluster indicates the characteristics of shim areas
which are the result of successive waves of immigrants settled in the
congested areas near the outer periphery of the city. The wards which are
included in this cluster (Table 5:6) show distinct pockets in locations
which are low lying and generally negative areas for habitation. These
areas also reveal the successive expansion of the dry's limits.

117
 Seven Cluster Solution *-T-""-f"'>v——-«.

Pune Municipal Corporation

125 Wards-1993

— — < Cantonments
——» — Pune Municipal Corporation

Fig. 5:5 Seven Cluster Solution

Cluster: 2
In cluster 2, the scores are average on all 4 factors i.e. factor I (.1928),
factor H (.1060), factor m (.3570) and factor IV (.5850). The wards
included in this cluster belong to lower middle class having undefined
structure areas. Table 5:6 and Figure 5:5.

Cluster: 3
In cluster 3, the score is average on Factor I (.2387), very high on Factor II
(1.0480) and very low on Factor m (-1.0289) and high on factor IV
(1.4119).
The uppercaste Hindu population dominates this area and the education
level of the population seems to be high. These are the wards which were
low density areas around the core, which are now seen in filling after large
scale industrial development took place. These areas still continue to grow,
merging with peripheral sections such as Aundh, Pashan etc. It is in these
areas that intra-urban movement has taken place, of old elite residents of
Pune, who earlier resided in the central part of the city. Many of the
managerial and technical elite who have recently shifted to Pune, also
reside here.

Cluster: 4
In this cluster the score on Factor 1 is very high (1.6610) moderately
negative on Factor II (-.6847) average on factor III (.1055) and moderately

118
negative on Factor IV (-.1230). This cluster forms part of an emerging high
middle class area where the professional class, generally new migrants to
Pune reside. Spatially this area is an extension of cluster three. These are
the peripheral wards which earlier had large empty spaces, but have now
experienced a building boom with spacious modern bungalows and luxury
apartments for the elite. There is a possibility that the wards which belong
to this cluster may have some slums which traditionally may belong to the
scheduled castes and depressed classes.

Cluster: 5
The scores on Factor I and Factor II are average i.e. .5009 and .7347
respectively . The wards of this cluster depict higher proportion of Hindu
upper castes with relatively moderate socio-economic status. As these
wards form part of the area in proximity to the core of city, these wards
have some traditional housing structures with moderately higher densities,
but marked with an absence of shim area. This is the area which is
undergoing rapid urban renewal. This cluster covers a significant part of
the outer parts of the old city and as such retains the traditional structure.

Cluster: 6
The wards which fall in this cluster form a compact area in the old core of
the city. Here the population forms a residual group of older inhabitants
belonging mainly to the lower middle class. The younger population in
these wards due to shortage of space has moved towards the urban fringe in
the newer housing colonies. With very high densities, this area has many

119
old dilapidated wadas, chawls and crumbling structures, presenting a
picture of urban blight. Many parts still retain their rural characteristics
with artisans following their traditional occupations.

Cluster: 7
The scores in this cluster, on factor I are low, but very high on ethnicity i.e.
factor II showing a fairly diverse migrant population with a dominant lower
income section. As such these wards have row houses and bungalow type
housing, no slums and fairly mixed population in terms of caste, class and
religion. From the spatial distribution pattern of wards it has been observed
that almost all wards of Pune Cantonment and Kirkee Cantonment fall in
this cluster.
As referred to in Chapter HI on the functional areas of Cantonment, the
major part of the Cantonment lands are occupied by the military bungalows
barracks, parade grounds, rifle ranges etc. The military personnel who
occupy these areas are not permanent residents by virtue of their
transferable jobs. Thus the Cantonment area has a mixed population from
all over India, belonging to more or less similar category like military
officers and other commissioned and non-commissioned officers.
Also, Pune Cantonment has the characteristics which are totally in contrast
to the indigenous Pune city of medieval origin. Here, the greater diversity
has emerged due to the legacy of Colonial Rule during which more
foreigners, fewer Hindus and larger number of migrants including people
form all over India such as Gujaratis, Marwaris, Parsis, Christians, Jews,
local migrants and also the depressed classes from the adjoining rural areas

120

i
came and settled. In general, in the Cantonment the caste-base
neighbourhoods are found in the Sadar Bazaar area as a large number of
people residing here have migrated form the city proper and from the
adjoining areas. Hence they have tried to create a similar social
environment in a much scaled down version of their original habitat
But the strict laws of the Cantonment Act and Cantonment Code have been
instrumental in keeping strict control on slums and illegal occupation of the
vast 'empty' spaces lying within the jurisdiction of the Cantonment. This
has resulted in a total absence of slums which has been clearly brought out
by very low score on this factor i.e., factor III (-.8688). Though the
Bhimpura area of Sadar Bazaar, with its diverse ethnic population and
extreme congestion could be cited as a unique example of an authorised
'slum-like* settlement in the Cantonment.

5*8 Emerging Social Areas: An Assessment

The use of Factorial Ecology in the present context revealed the two
Cantonments as separate socio-curtural identities, so on a broad level the
method was useful to bring out the differences between the old city of
indigenous origin and the Cantonment which had very different peopling
history.
Comparing the social areasfromwithin a city, with that of the Cantonment,
it was observed that social areas were more fragmented rather than
continuous, as one found in western cities. The city core which has
retained its medieval social structure, fits more closely with the ideas of the'

121
pre-industrial notions of Sjoberg's model, where the basic difference was
that distinctions by caste were stronger than those by occupations and class.
In the later modern developments, greater complexity was visible as
influences of Colonial Rule disturbed the idealized pattern of the Hoyt's
sectoral model. The most recent suburban developments tend to follow both
class-based neighbourhood where both, high middle and low income
groups are mingled together in close proximity, with little regard to caste.
In contrast, the Cantonment has always displayed a more diversified
population structure with sharp class distinctions in Bungalow and Sadar
Bazaar area. The lanes and the bye-lanes of the Sadar bazaar which earlier
housed the lower and the depressed classes who renderd services to the
Army personnel are now slowly being modified into lower middle class
areas due to large scale development beyond the Cantonment limits.
Today, the Cantonment is no longer an appendage of the main city but it
exists as an island, engulfed by massive developments on all sides with a lot
of hustle and bustle of commuters passing through to the new suburbs
beyond.

122
A schematic diagram showing Pune city's social urban form according to
the role Pune city had to play.
As it is evident from the above diagram, Kasbe Pune was already in
existence as an appendage to earlier garrison town established by the
Muslims at the point where the river was easily boardable- a little to the
north - west of the Shaniwar wada -the fort palace of the Peshwa. The
original nucleus had a classical social structure. The city had a single
compact nucleus with more or less concentrically arranged social areas,
fanning outwards from the temple complexes which were exclusively
colonized by the Brahmins. Around this was a girdle of the Maratha
landlords, the traditional warrior class whose mansions formed the outer
core, while the peripheral lanes which lead to the old city's edge, marking
its outer limits, housed the artisans and the agriculturists.

123
By the time the Peshwas declared Pune as their capital in the seventeenth
century, it had already acquired a cellular urban form evolving into a city
of the Peths. The cellular neighbourhood of the 18 peths were meant to
have a full compliment of trade and shopping facilities and services of the
various communities for the people to fulfill the needs of the capital.
However, a coherent urban form never emerged for Pune despite several
physical interventions - first by the Peshawa (cellular structure of Peths),
later by the British (Kirkee and Pune Cantonments) and subsequntly after
the independence by the Indian Government (multi nuclei peripheral
suburbs of the post industrial period).

124
Table 5:1 Rotated Factor Matrix

Sr. no FACTOR 1 FACTOR II FACTOR III FACTOR IV

1 CWR -.05805 -.15094 ,06133 ,94629
2 DRAINOP -.10734 ,00629 ,81426 ,23528
3 ELECBILL .55128 .10023 -.41120 -.09073
4 EQPCAT2 .79398 ,11931 -.42019 -.17346
5 FANS -.13710 .22761 -.01369 ,74473
6 LOEDUF -.23168 -.01273 .75115 -.12751
7 FLAT ,77121 -.11468 -.14510 -.04326
8 HUT -.17356 .23517 .72112 ,02618
9 LATERN1 ,66495 ,07425 -.58685 -.00593
10 LOPCASTE -.13350 -.44460 ,44242 ,38758
11 MHIEDU ,66875 ,42392 -,26050 -.40929
12 MOTHTON1 -.00200 ,86161 ,26511 -.00617
13 OWN .79161 ,30090 ,21301 ,11688
14 PCCHILD -.01692 -.15143 ,07463 ,94310
15 RELIG0N1 .11317 ,86825 ,23942 ,06732
16 RELIG0N5 -.17573 -.63811 ,10380 ,04013
17 TWOWHEEL ,71333 .35266 -.23106 -.14468
18 UPCASTE ,19388 .87912 -,15967 -.10306

Table 5:2 Final Statistics

3r.no Variable Communality * Factor Eigenvalue PctofVar Cum Pet

1 CWR ,92537 1 6,07056 33.7 33,7
2 DRAINOP ,72994 2 3,23677 18,0 51.7
3 ELECBILL ,49128 3 2,42802 13,5 65.2
4 EQPCAT2 .85128 4 1,31275 7.3 72,5
5 FANS ,62541
6 LOEDUF ,63432 '
7 FLAT ,63085
a HUT ,60613
9 LATERN1 ,79210
10 LOPCASTE .56145
11 MHIEDU ,86232
12 M0THT0N1 ,81270
13 OWN .77622
14 PCCHILD ,91823
15 RELIG0N1 ,82852
16 RELIG0N5 ,44791
17 TWOWHEEL ,70753
18 UPCASTE ,84656

VARIMAX rotation 1forextraction 1 in analysis 1 - Kaiser Normalization

VARIMAX convene in 6 iterations.

125
Table 5:3 Factor Transformation Matrix

Factor 1 Factor II Factor III Factor IV

Factor 1 ,69439 ,42180 -,47426 -.33910
Factor It -,09465 ,82200 ,55969 ,04589
Factor III ,36275 ,04949 -,08729 ,92647
Factor IV._ ,61423 -,37941 ,67395 -.15673

Table 5:4 Factor Score Coefficient Matrix

Factor I Factor II Factor III Factor IV

CWR ,03524 -.00006 -.04572 ,35657
DRAINOP ,14811 -.04099 ,34917 ,02523
ELECBILL .12147 -.01430 -.07243 .01607
EQPCAT2 .21739 -.04660 -.01565 -,00858
FANS -07590 ,13950 -.11735 ,301'36
LOEDUF ,07462 -,04293 ,32033 -.11601
FLAT ,30887 -.14211 ,12205 .00781
HUT ,05985 .04570 ,28544 -.03900
LATERN1 ,13485 -.02017 -.13539 ,06471
LOPCASTE ,12047 -.15396 ,19084 ,09019
MHIEDU ,15099 ,05162 ,02456 -.10085
MOTHTON1 -,06531 ,27727 ,02578 ,02153
OWN ,34380 -.02308 ,25071 ,06438
PCCHILD ,05575 -.00756 -,02948 ,35527
RELIGON1 -.02158 ,26887 ,06064 ,05559
RELIGON5 ,04340 -,20318 ,06182 -.03015
TWOWHEEL ,19370 .03152 ,03433 -.00212
UPCASTE -.08568 ,28685 -.10083 ,02308

126
Table 5:5 Ward-wise distribution of Factor Scores

No. ward area fact1_1 fact2J fact3J fact4_1

1 1 DAPODI -.56766 ,31739 3.48185 -.18412

2 2 DAPODI-CME -1,34719 ,52735 90656 ,45170
3 3 SANJAY GANDHI-H 1,77705 1,04329 -1,30599 2.14201
4 4 BOPODI -.44402 -.01573 ,92595 .81136
5 5 PUNE UNIVERSITY ,03205 ,89269 ,28346 .16226
6 6 AGRICULTURE COL ,15199 -,13424 ,59566 1.36135
7 7 JANGLI MAHARAJA 2,10779 -.11997 ,37786 -.48016
8 8 SHIVA NAGAR ,97851 ,25874 -,21778 -.73022
0 9 SHANIWARWADA ,16054 .12558 -.52133 -.99770
10 10 ENGG. COLLEGE -.25155 -.29736 ,22846 -.31599
11 11 CIVIL COURT ,44649 1,26304 ,01060 -.85392
12 12 PARNAKUTI .54132 -.14782 -,23444 1,20789
13 13 VISHRANTWADI ,58571 ,16596 ,60863 1,13206
14 14 PRIZON PRESS -.79241 ,69792 -.71727 3,80365
15 15 PHULE NAGAR .10142 ,15246 ,19510 .85261
16 16 SANGAM 1,62479 -.71379 -.57226 1.43264
17 17 LOHAGAON 1,04075 -.08144 ,42759 1.73996
18 18 YERWADA ,66612 -.60807 ,00598 1.26677
19 19 KASTURBASMARAK -,18388 -.13084 2,55715 ,75702
20 20 NAVtKHADKI -.73828 -1,06744 -.17861 ,70860
21 21 MAHATMA GANDHI ,23126 ,60240 1.14022 1.71438
22 22 YERWADA GAWTH .70375 -.93960 1.60713 .42358
23 23 KOREGAON PARK 2,66321 -.42718 -.79065 ,26449
24 24 SHIVAJI STADIUM -.14099 ,24555 1,38656 ,71198
25 25 MALDHAKKA -.64798 -.90672 ,99899 .51847
26 26 KASBAPETH P-ST -.35063 ,47330 -.49791 -1,31059
27 27 KAMLA NEHRU HOS ,95465 ,09210 ,77760 -.12132
28 28 MUNDHWA -1,40422 ,61562 ,45025 -.82808
29 29 AMBEDKAR UDYAN ,73369 -1,41937 ,52021 -1,90037
30 30 ZILLA PARISHAD ,22378 ,09593 -.31045 -.21584
31 31 VIKAS NAGAR -.24688 -.45157 2,50341 -.10332
32 32 KASBAGANPATI -60066 1.17429 -,82961 -.67219
33 33 NAGARPATTA ,66842 ,51216 -.27312 -.80155
34 34 SATTOTI HAUD -1,78636 -.19119 1,31189 -.20200
35 36 TARACHAND HOS ,64307 -,82632 -.32903 -1,89887
36 36 KEM HOSPITAL ,31942 ,29338 ,11093 -.66787
37 37 RASTAPETH POW -.02127 ,13267 -.50877 .11055
38 38 GAVKOS MARUTI -1.12476 -.20986 -.29864 -1,40921
39 39 JIJAMATA UDYAN -1,12476 -.20986 ,52968 -,10873
40 40 WANORIE 2,06812 -1,44223 -.14830 -.24027
41 41 GLIDING CENTRE -1,07801 ,95250 -.05179 -.51764
42 42 GANESHPETH -1.09091 1,52654 -.69821 -.74337
43 43 KESARI WADA ,92998 ,23486 -.41361 ,86753
44 44 PADAMJI PARK ,11092 -1,47267 -.25007 -1,97891
45 45 PARSI AGYARI ,21900 -1,50685 .00398 -.74337

127
Table 5:5 Continued...

No. ward area fact1_1 fact2_1 fact3_1 fact4_1

46 46 RAJEWADI -1,40778 -.66189 ,12003 -.88931

47 47 HADAPSAR 1,38711 -,30971 ,38092 .08996
48 48 RAMTEKDI -.14544 -.05570 2.17014 -.11531
49 49 SOMESHWAR -1,65265 -.75199 -.40735 -.97741
50 50 DOKE HAMAL TALI -,58285 ,06100 -.54515 ,31271
51 51 CITY POST -1,80705 ,53742 -.51445 -,19840
52 52 RAMOSHI GATE ,53075 -1,51202 -.57508 ,00501
53 53 LAXMI BAZAR -1,39924 -.09286 -.55440 -,35671
54 54 BURUD BRIDGE ,85331 -.73952 ,56817 ,90052
55 55 BADARIYA GIRLS S ,25884 -.17963 -.66900 ,21748
56 56 DR.KOTNIS HOSP -.79985 ,37812 -.17553 ,86728
57 57 MAHATMA PHULE -.67958 ,79470 -.37354 -.42321
58 58 HARAK NAGAR ,35272 -,36328 -.09940 -.09648
59 59 TIMBER MARKET -.09370 -.44311 1,74020 -.24695
60 60 KASEWADI -.23046 -.61048 1,06765 -.22253
61 61 SONAVANE HOSP -.00470 -.31523 ,49953 -.45142
62 62 LOHIYANAGAR -.40305 -.25952 3,93150 1,54620
63 63 JAIN MANDIR .72685 -.84202 -.20545 ,04757
64 64 SUBUSHSAH DUR -,33220 -.15548 -.59845 -.64540
65 65 KONDHWA 1,12149 -.88970 ,08668 ,51639
66 66 MIRA SOCIETY -.77245 -.34458 ,63517 ,68859
67 67 PMC COLONY -1,01992 -.54197 .15170 1,05496
68 68 MOMINPURA -.08011 -1.61237 2,21640 -1,33899
69 69 BIBWEWADI 1.82497 ,06683 ,40203 -.00720
70 70 RAJAKELKAR ,94157 -.47043 ,33371 ,55937
71 71 MAHARSHI NAGAR 2.60524 -.34286 ,51901 -.39206
72 72 GURUWAR PETH -2,02548 ,46640 -,97694 -.45138
73 73 GHORPADE PETH U -.65920 -1,64430 -.46267 -.21953
74 74 NEHRU STADIUM -.00909 ,96380 -.41296 -38292
75 75 LOKHANDE TALIM .64230 1,81430 -,97308 -1,65819
76 76 ADINATH SOCIETY 1.40807 -1,09134 ,59020 -.68348
77 77 VISHRAMBAGWAD ,23732 ,93460 -.10692 -.99551
78 78 SWGATE P LINE -.01142 1,30196 -.73627 ,49138
79 79 MAHARANAPRATA -.95263 ,84509 -.48640 -1,67346
80 80 MITRA MANDAL -.12840 ,86160 -.23205 -.11085
81 81 PARVATIDARSHAN -.16233 ,47696 ,39378 -.15997
82 82 S.P. COLLEGE 1,69630 1,33168 -.84549 -.85607
83 83 SHANKARMAHARA ,56132 ,61485 ,38499 .34987
84 84 PADMAVATI 1,18500 ,73629 -.25717 -.59810
85 85 SARASBAG ,08846 ,95373 ,79590 -.37472
86 86 SADASHIV PETH ,54942 .-1,21851 -.74024 -1,02462
87 87 TAUAI MANDIR ,53978 ,57741 -.11778 ,29728
88 88 SHAHU COLLEGE ,11968 ,89980 ,25287 -.76153
89 89 PARVATI -.98088 1,22018 ,96505 ,46477

128
Table 5:5 Continued...

No. ward area fact1_1 fact2_1 fad3_1 fact4_1

90 90 LOKMANYANGAR 1,83254 1,32982 -,41363 -,30394

91 91 PARVATIJALKEND -.75922 ,87870 1,84172 -,06690
92 92 RAJENDRANAGAR -.97156 -.37779 1,45720 -,49260
93 93 PANMALADUTTAW ,81251 1,08550 -.54821 ,65415
94 94 DNYANPROBIHIDI -1.55732 1,43848 1,00379 -1,82095
95 95 MHATRE BRIDGE ,65156 1,26081 -.28422 -1,42972
96 98 KARVENAGAR -1,70693 2,01398 -1,07809 2,52944
97 97 ERANDWANA -.25233 1,38580 -,72302 ,65020
98 98 DECCAN GYM ,53601 1,05417 -1,30933 1,01982
99 99 SNDT COLLEGE ,13725 ,78402 -.53318 -.06562
100 100 BHARATI VIDHYA ,89693 ,77566 1,18875 ,04872
101 101 KOTHRUD -.66600 ,87510 -,22957 ,50377
102 102 KAMLA NEHRU UD ,51544 ,63928 -.32655 -.21813
103 103 HANUMAN NGR -.51959 -.43847 1,20450 -.76568
104 104 FERCUSSON COLL ,17988 1,15679 -,40566 -,22695
105 105 PASHAN 1,23082 .65351 -.71077 ,69983
106 106 MAFCO -1,74727 ,68414 -,46207 ,91980
107 107 CHATURSHRINGI ,62918 ,83212 -,64618 -1,16713
108 108 AUNDH NCL 1,46714 ,68820 -1,09582 ,64647
109 109 VADARVAD! ,35576 ,64797 ,52105 ,13265
110 110 GOVERNMENT POL 1,38404 ,73654 -,89811 -1,40950
111 111 RAJ BHAVAN -.24276 -.08170 -.54988 -1,18865
112 1 PCB-1 -,67033 -2,49846 -1.22249 -.90194
113 2 PCB-2 -.41478 -2,15992 -.80589 ,93748
114 3 PCB-3 -.68068 -1,94132 -1,42729 -1,38516
115 4 PCB-4 -.24712 -2,31737 -1,40257 -2,34955
116 5 PCB-5 -.27371 -2,79524 -.70231 -,03434
117 6 PCB-6 -.29038 -2,45831 -.90981 ,68413
118 7 PCB-7 -,67419 ,55564 -2,06381 1,48155
119 8 KCB-1 -56425 -1,48618 -,54981 1,24162
120 9 KCB-2 -.38999 -1,59993 -1,26354 2,02254
121 10 KCB-3 -.10372 -1,85458 -.91621 1,88305
122 11 KCB-4 -3,02131 ,05338 -156672 ,33763
123 12 KCB-5 -.63933 -.74009 -1,38973 ,06187
124 13 KCB-6 -,81086 -48902 -1,55981 ,56326
125 14 KCB-7 -1,18988 -1,66984 -1,15709 ,28954

129
Table 5:6 Number of Case in each Cluster.

Cluster unweighted cases weighted

cases
1 14,0 14,0
2 28,0 28,0
3 10,0 10,0
4 11,0 11,0
5 25,0 25,0
6 20,0 20,0
7 17.0 17.0

Missing 0 0
Valid 125,0 125,0
cases

Table 5:7 Final Ouster Centres

Cluster FAC1-1 FAC1-2 FAC1-3 FAC1-4

1 -,4237 -,3729 2,0064 -,0352
2 ,1928 ,1060 ,3570 ,5850
3 ,2387 1,0480 -1,0289 1,4119
4 1,6610 -,6847 ,1055 -,1230
5 ,5009 ,7347 -,3442 -.8099
6 -1,2917 ,5075 -,2791 -,4594
7 .,4007 -1,7184 -,8688 ,0461

Table 5:8 Distribution of wards acconding to the Seven Cluster Solution

WARD AREA QCL.1 QCL_2

1 DAPODI 1,64207
19 KASTURBA SMARAK 1,02328
22 YEARWADA GAWATHA 1,40079
25 MALDHAKKA U87J2
31 VKASNAGAR ,53768
34 SATTOTIHAUT 1,54919
48 RAMTEKDI ,45969
59 TIMBER MARKET ,47910
60 KASEWADI 1,00505
62 LOHIYANAGAR 2,49403
68 MOMINPURA 1,84340
91 PARVATIJALKEND 1,30663
92 RAJENDARANAGAR ,90054
103 HANUMAN NAGAR 1,09092
Nuimber of cases read: 14 Number of cases listed: 14

130
Table 5:8 Continued...

WARD AREA QCLJ QCL_2

4 BOPODI 2 ,89182
5 PUNE UNIVERSITY 2 ,91035
6 AGRICULTURE COL 2 ,84803
10 ENGG. COLLEGE 2 1,0901!
12 PARNAKUTI 2 ,96106
13 VISHRANTWADI 2 ,72157
15 PHULENAGR 2 ,33209
17 LOHAGOAN 2 1,44681
18 YERWADA 2 1,14981
21 MAHATMAGANHI 2 1,46184
24 SHIVAJI STADIUYM 2 1,09866
27 KAMLA NEHRU HOS 2 1,12090
37 RASTAPETHPOWE 2 1,01049
43 KESARIWADA 2 1,11073
54 BURUD BRIDGE 2 1,13818
55 SADARIYA HIGHS 2 1,12854
56 DR.KOTNISHOSPI 2 1,19226
58 HARAKNAGAR 2 ,95835
61 SONAVANF HOSPIT 2 1,14491
66 MIRA SOCIETY 2 1,10492
67 PMC COLONY 2 1,46750
70 RAJAKELKAR 2 ,94562
81 PARVATIDARSHAN 2 ,90551
83 SHANKAR MAHARAJ 2 ,67140
87 TALJAIMANDIR 2 ,80669
89 PARVATI 2 1,73292
100 BHARATIVIDHYAP 2 1,38696
109 VADARWADI 2 ,14291
Number of cases read: 28 Number of cases listed: 28

131
Table 5:8 Continued...

WARD AREA QCL_1 QCL_2

3 SANJAY GANDHI 3 1,72529
14 PRIZON PRESS 3 2,64630
78 SWAGATE P LINE 3 1,02952
93 PANMALA DUTTAWA 3 1,06576
96 KARVENAGAR 3 2,44333
97 ERANDWANA 3 1,06576
98 DECCAN GYMKHANA 3 ,56641
105 PASHAN 3 1,32218
108 AUNDHNCL 3 1,49296
118 PCB-7 3 1,46686
Number of cases read : 10 Number of cases listed: 10

WARD AREA QCLJ QCL_2

7 JUNGLIMAHARAJ 4 ,86679
16 SANGAM 4 1,52659
23 KOREGOANPARK 4 1,27881
29 AMBEDKARUDYAN 4 1,38582
40 WANORIE 4 ,95998
47 HADAPSAR 4 ,57184
63 JAINMANDIR 4 1,08650
65 KONDHWA 4 ,83122
69 BIBWEWADI 4 ,76348
71 MAHARSHINAGAR 4 1,09714
76 ADINATH SOCIETY 4 1,08257

Number of cases read: 11 Number of cases listed: 11

132
Table 5:8 Continued...

WARD AREA QCLJ QCL_2

8 SHIVAJINAGAR 5 ,73744
9 SHANIWAR WADA 5 ,80737
11 CIVIL COURT 5 ,59270
26 KASBAPETHP-ST 5 1,06920
30 ZILLAPARISHAD 5 ,93338
33 MAGARPATTA 5 ,34539
35 TARACHANDHOSP 5 1,15637
36 K.E.M. HOSPITAL 5 ,71012
74 NEHRU STADnJM 5 ,65673
75 LOKHANDE TALIM 5 1,37057
77 VISHRAMBAG WADA 5 ,44101
80 MITRAMDAL 5 ,91216
82 S.P.COLLEGE 5 1,40897
84 PADMAVATI 5 ,71803
85 SARASBAG 5 1,28147
86 SADSMVPETH 5 ,63428
88 SHAHU COLLEGE 5 ,71280
90 LOKMANAYA NAGAR 5 1,51221
95 MHATRE BRIDGE 5 ,82655
99 S.N.D.T. COLLEGE 5 ,80749
102 KAMALA NEHRU UDY 5 ,57018
104 FERGUSSON COLLEGE 5 ,72077
107 CHATURSHRINGHI 5 ,52147
110 GOVERNMENT POLY 5 1,20573
111 RAJBHAVAN 5 1,24218

Number of cases read: 25 Number of cases read : 25

133
Table 5:8 Continued...

WARD AREA QCL_1 QCL.2

2 DAPODI-CME 6 1,49646
28 MUNDWA 6 ,88068
32 KASBA GANPATI
ATI 6 1,12715
38 GAVKOS MARUTI
lUTI 6 1,21977
39 JIJAMATAUDYAN
>YAN 6 1,14934
41 GLIDING CENTER
ITER 6 ,54662
42 GANESHPETH fi 6 1,15520
46 RAJ1WADI 6 1,31344
49 SOMESHWAR 6 1,41470
50 DQKEHAMALL 6 1,16989
51 CITY POST 6 ,62445
53 LAXM BAZAR R 6 ,67696
57 MAHATMA 6 ,68367
64 iDURG
SUBHANSHAHDURG 6 1,22341
72 GURUWARPITH;TH 6 1,01346
79 MAHARANAPRATAP
RATAP 6 1,32135
94 DNYANPROBHODINI
HODINI 6 2,10646
101 KOTHRUD 6 1,20694
106 MAFCO 6 1,47436
122 KCB-4 6 2,34324

Number of cases : 20 Number of cases listed

WARD AREA QCL_1 QCL_2

44 PADAMJIPARK 7 ,57251
45 PARSIAGYARI 7 1,07516
112 PCB-1 7 1,40443
114 PCB-2 7 1,13468
115 PCB-3 7 1,29311
20 NAVIKHADAKI 7 ,93140
52 RAMOSHIGATE 7 1,24096
73 GHORPADEPETHU 7 1,00697
113 PCB-2 7 ,60160
116 PCB-5 7 1,39525
117 PCB-6 7 ,85352
119 KCB-1 7 ,67109
120 KCB-2 7 1,40170
121 KCB-3 7 1,27850
123 KCB-5 7 1,20785
124 KCB--6 7 1,37601
125 KCB-7 7 ,87416

Number of cases read: 17 Number of cases listed : 17

134