Biggest population changes in Sri Muktsar Sahib district
Computed from 228 villages where both counts are usable. Nobody publishes this ranking; it is not in either source.
OverviewBiggest changesSchool staffing
Fastest growing villages in Sri Muktsar Sahib district
Ranked by the change between the Census 2011 count and the 2020 Mission Antyodaya survey.
| # | Village | 2011 | 2020 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Muktsar(Rural) (54) | 1,989 | 4,900 | +146.3% |
| 2 | Dabwali Dhab (56) | 2,110 | 4,705 | +123.0% |
| 3 | Chauntra (106) | 1,201 | 2,550 | +112.3% |
| 4 | Khokhar (71) | 2,806 | 5,260 | +87.5% |
| 5 | Ramnagar Khazan Singh (192) | 807 | 1,510 | +87.1% |
| 6 | Rohurianwali (55) | 2,727 | 4,900 | +79.7% |
| 7 | Bari Hari Urf Harike Kalan (89) | 8,024 | 14,350 | +78.8% |
| 8 | Motlewala (96) | 1,157 | 2,050 | +77.2% |
| 9 | Bhalerian (188) | 1,749 | 3,012 | +72.2% |
| 10 | Karniwala (25) | 579 | 995 | +71.8% |
| 11 | Randhawa (147) | 297 | 500 | +68.3% |
| 12 | Ghumar Khera (164) | 1,582 | 2,625 | +65.9% |
| 13 | Shergarh Gian Singh (187) | 1,857 | 3,010 | +62.1% |
| 14 | Ranjitgarh (159) | 2,205 | 3,478 | +57.7% |
| 15 | Chak Dohak (145) | 127 | 200 | +57.5% |
| 16 | Kutianwali (37) | 2,527 | 3,933 | +55.6% |
| 17 | Sheikhu (166) | 826 | 1,280 | +55.0% |
| 18 | Bhagu (11) | 1,084 | 1,670 | +54.1% |
| 19 | Alamwala (172) | 5,254 | 7,920 | +50.7% |
| 20 | Khane Ki Dhab (189) | 2,000 | 3,006 | +50.3% |
Villages that shrank most in Sri Muktsar Sahib district
A falling count usually means out-migration, but in a small village it can also mean a boundary change.
| # | Village | 2011 | 2020 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mallan (81) | 8,451 | 6,123 | -27.6% |
| 2 | Ghagga (21) | 3,326 | 2,600 | -21.8% |
| 3 | Kotli Dewan (108) | 1,919 | 1,550 | -19.2% |
| 4 | Bhullar (74) | 4,483 | 4,250 | -5.2% |
| 5 | Ratta Khera (173) | 1,609 | 1,535 | -4.6% |
| 6 | Nurpur Kirpalke (135) | 1,360 | 1,300 | -4.4% |
| 7 | Sahib Chand (12) | 2,700 | 2,600 | -3.7% |
| 8 | Kanianwali (150) | 3,984 | 3,950 | -0.8% |
| 9 | Seikh (29) | 939 | 943 | +0.4% |
| 10 | Peori (6) | 4,091 | 4,134 | +1.1% |
| 11 | Gulabewala (132) | 2,013 | 2,040 | +1.3% |
| 12 | Tamkot (39) | 2,653 | 2,695 | +1.6% |
| 13 | Husnar (17) | 5,646 | 5,749 | +1.8% |
| 14 | Tharajwala (162) | 4,194 | 4,280 | +2.0% |
| 15 | Sarai Naga (90) | 2,812 | 2,870 | +2.1% |
| 16 | Bharu (9) | 2,744 | 2,801 | +2.1% |
| 17 | Sakanwali (142) | 1,430 | 1,460 | +2.1% |
| 18 | Fakarsar (18) | 3,471 | 3,559 | +2.5% |
| 19 | Khunan Khurd (33) | 2,109 | 2,170 | +2.9% |
| 20 | Madhir (15) | 4,088 | 4,213 | +3.1% |
What this ranking leaves out, and why.
2 villages here had fewer than 100 people in
2011 — at that size a percentage says more about the surveyor than the village,
so they are excluded. A further 1 sit within half a
point of the limits beyond which we treat a figure as implausible (+150% or
−40%): they are the villages that only just survived that test, not the fastest
moving, and ranking them first would be misleading. That is
3 excluded in total.
How the limits are set.