Digg
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
Stumbleupon
Delicious
India - Third Economic Census 1990
| Reference ID | IDDI-IND-MOSPI-3-EC-1990 |
| Year | 0 |
| Country | India |
| Producer(s) | Central Statistical Organisation(CSO) - Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India (GOI) |
| Collection(s) |
Created on
Apr 24, 2018
Last modified
Mar 29, 2019
Page views
562102
- 02 Andhra Pradesh
- 03 Arunachal Pradesh
- 04 Assam
- 05 Bihar
- 06 Goa
- 07 Gujarat
- 08 Haryana
- 09 Himachal Pradesh
- 11 Karnataka
- 12 Kerala
- 13 Madhya Pradesh
- 14 Maharashtra
- 15 Manipur
- 16 Meghalaya
- 17 Mizoram
- 18 Nagaland
- 19 Orissa
- 20 Punjab
- 21 Rajasthan
- 22 Sikkim
- 23 Tamil Nadu
- 24 Tripura
- 25 Utter Pradesh
- 26 West Bengal
- 27 Andaman & Nic
obar - 28 Chandigarh
- 29 Dadar & Nagar
Haveli - 30 Daman & Diu
- 31 Delhi
- 33 Pondicherry
Srl. No. of Enterprise (Without premises)
(SRL_NO_ENTP_WOP)
File: 29 Dadar & Nagar Haveli
File: 29 Dadar & Nagar Haveli
Overview
Type:
Discrete Format: character Width: 4 | Valid cases: 2700 Invalid: 0 |
Categories
| Value | Category | Cases | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 2185 |  80.9%
| |
| 1 | 67 | 2.5%
| |
| 10 | 18 | 0.7%
| |
| 11 | 16 | 0.6%
| |
| 12 | 13 | 0.5%
| |
| 13 | 14 | 0.5%
| |
| 14 | 13 | 0.5%
| |
| 15 | 12 | 0.4%
| |
| 16 | 12 | 0.4%
| |
| 17 | 11 | 0.4%
| |
| 18 | 10 | 0.4%
| |
| 19 | 8 | 0.3%
| |
| 2 | 49 | 1.8%
| |
| 20 | 6 | 0.2%
| |
| 21 | 5 | 0.2%
| |
| 22 | 4 | 0.1%
| |
| 23 | 5 | 0.2%
| |
| 24 | 5 | 0.2%
| |
| 25 | 5 | 0.2%
| |
| 26 | 5 | 0.2%
| |
| 27 | 5 | 0.2%
| |
| 28 | 3 | 0.1%
| |
| 29 | 2 | 0.1%
| |
| 3 | 42 | 1.6%
| |
| 30 | 2 | 0.1%
| |
| 31 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 32 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 33 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 34 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 35 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 36 | 2 | 0.1%
| |
| 37 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 38 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 39 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 4 | 40 | 1.5%
| |
| 40 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 41 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 42 | 1 | 0.0%
| |
| 5 | 33 | 1.2%
| |
| 6 | 31 | 1.1%
| |
| 7 | 25 | 0.9%
| |
| 8 | 22 | 0.8%
| |
| 9 | 19 | 0.7%
|
Warning: these figures indicate the number of cases found in the data file. They cannot be interpreted as summary statistics of the population of interest.