This income group consisted of landless labourers, workers, petty artisans and cowherds whose annual income was below Rs. 1,800. The families in this group generally resided in a single room tenement which served as a kitchen, study room, store-room, bedroom etc. The people living in the urban areas stayed in very congested localities whereas the people in rural areas resided in small hutments made of hay, bamboo and sometimes wood. Generally these houses were crowded in the locality. The small earthen pots and articles of their domestic use spoke eloquently of their poverty.
In the 97 families surveyed from this group there were 143 earning members. The family from this group was composed of 4 adults and 3 minors thus making 5 and a half units on the whole per family.
From this group 55 families out of 97 i.e., 56.7 per cent possessed houses valued at Rs. 1,554 on an average. Their annual income amounted to about Rs. 1,400 and was supplemented by income from land in case of 10 families to the tune of Rs. 1,524 per annum on an average. Their occupational income amounted to Rs. 1,272. There was considerable indebtedness among the families in this group. 38 families from this group i.e., 39.17 per cent were found indebted to the tune of Rs. 36,431 in the aggregate and Rs. 960 on an average. Only 10 families disclosed their savings which were Rs. 10,570 in aggregate.
The average total monthly expenditure of a family in this group was Rs. 123 of which Rs. 53 were spent on cereals, Rs. 10 on oils and Rs. 11 on vegetables, i.e., nearly 74 rupees or 49 per cent of their total income was spent on foodgrains only. The people in this group staying in urban areas spent nearly Rs. 10 per month for education whereas the people in rural areas spent less on the same. The expenditure on entertainment for a family in urban areas averaged Rs. 5. The families in this group and especially in rural areas generally possessed cattle such as cows, goats and buffaloes for milk and also bullocks for cultivation. The total number of such families was 50. They naturally spent less on milk and ghee as compared to other families in this group. The expenses on lighting and education accounted for Rs. 5 and
Rs. 12, respectively per family. With regard to rent 66 families i.e., 68 per cent in the rural areas were residing in their own
premises, whereas 31 families i.e., 32 per cent of the total families
staying in urban areas on an average paid Rs. 14 monthly on rent
and municipal taxes.
The clothes and wearing apparel of the families in this group was poor as compared to those in Groups I and II. Their annual expenses on this item came to Rs. 220 on an average. The clothes which they usually put on were of inferior quality. On socio-religious occasions the family spent about Rs. 41 per annum. But instances of families spending much more on this item were not rare. Generally the expenditure on this account was considerably more in rural areas than in the urban ones. Religious expenditure was one of the many reasons for the indebtedness of many rural families. The families living in the urban areas spent about Rs. 103 per annum towards medical expenses. The expenditure on this item was much less in the rural areas. The families in this group spent much less on travelling and miscellaneous items, their average annual expenditure on this item amounting to Rs. 62 only.
The equipment required for daily use in a family from this group was meagre and of a poor quality. It mostly consisted of a drum to store water, earthen pots, some vessels and in some cases pots made of brass viz., thali, tambya, vati etc. Very few families possessed milch animals such as goats, cows, buffaloes etc. A pair of bullocks was beyond their reach. They had very little other equipments. Their bedding was simple and prepared from coarse cloth. Literacy percentage was very small, though recently a marked improvement has been seen due to the extension of educational concessions and facilities by the Government.