Bhagat et al. (2018) 4 conducted a study that focused on housing characteristics in nine villages located in the Melghat areas of Maharashtra and these areas are known for their high levels of poverty and malnutrition. In a study by Ibrahim Yakubu et al. 5, the link between housing conditions, resident health, and poverty levels was explored in the Metropolitan area. The findings revealed that a majority of houses in this area lack essential in-house facilities. Wei Guo 6 found that housing type and size have a significant impact on the health of migrants, while housing instability has a greater effect on the health of urban locals. Maria Löfstedt 7 conducted a new case study that reviewed the relationship between physical housing characteristics, housing accessibility, and various aspects of health among older people living in the community. Coley et al. 8 conducted research that demonstrated how poor housing conditions negatively affect the development of children and adolescents. Dekker et al. 9 concluded that individual characteristics such as age, presence of children, and length of stay are more influential in explaining residential satisfaction than specific estate characteristics. In a study by Daan Schipper 10, it was found that various socio-demographic variables have a significant impact on subjective well-being in relation to housing characteristics, as well as certain economic activities. Esraa A. Attia 11 aimed to reveal the relationship between rural housing characteristics and social-economic variables for the heads of families residing in these areas. Rabiul Ansary and Bhaswati Das 1 concluded that households lacking good housing conditions and basic amenities, which are essential for healthy and productive manpower, tend to have lower assets.

The paper aims at examine the pattern of housing characteristics in India and its 30 states based on secondary data during the period of 1992–93 of N.F.H.S-1 to 2019-21 of N.F.H.S-5.

Electricity plays a crucial role in the daily lives of humans and is a significant factor in the modern economy. It is utilized for various purposes such as lighting, heating, cooling, refrigeration, operating appliances, computers/electronics, machinery, and transportation systems. Yunqing Lu et al. 12 conducted a study on energy consumption and household characteristics by implementing a dynamic pricing experiment in communal housing within a smart community in Japan. Table 1 illustrates the distribution of households with electricity in India and its states.

Table 1 reveals those substantial variations in households with access to electricity during the period of N.F.H.S-1 to N.F.H.S-3. However, access to electricity drastically improved in India and its states in the period of N.F.H.S-4 and N.F.H.S-5. In most states, over 95 percent of sampled households have electricity and almost all households in India (97%) have electricity in N.F.H.S- 5 of 2019-20. It clearly indicates that sampled households had electricity for many purposes in their homes to lead better life.

The provision and availability of safe drinking water and sanitation plays a crucial role in enhancing the quality of life and promoting good health. It helps in reducing illnesses, water-borne diseases, and fatalities, leading to lower health expenses, increased savings, and enhanced human efficiency. In rural areas, women or girls are typically tasked with fetching water from various sources for household purposes. The accessibility of water was a key aspect of the Minimum Need Programme initiated between 1974 and 1979 to cater to all segments of society. Ensuring access to clean and safe drinking water is essential for overall health and well-being. In certain states like Manipur, Odisha, Meghalaya, Tripura, Jharkhand, and Madhya Pradesh, around 33 percent of households, and in states like Nagaland, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh, and Rajasthan, approximately 25 percent of households, obtain water from sources located away from their homes 3 . Drinking water serves various vital functions in the body, such as regulating body temperature, maintaining healthy skin, and aiding in digestion (Duselis, Amanda R et al., 2007 and Amend, Sarah R et al., 2016). The National Family Health Survey (N.F.H.S) recognizes improved sources of drinking water, “including piped water, public taps, standpipes, tube wells, boreholes, protected dug wells and springs, rainwater, and community reverse osmosis (RO) plants”. These sources help safeguard against external contamination, ensuring that the water is safe for consumption.

Table 2 reveals that significant percent of households had increaseaccess to improved source of drinking water in India and its states during the study period. In N.F.H.S-1, only over 40.0 percent access to improved source of drinking water in states like Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Tripura and Kerala being with least 21.0 percent) wherein most of the households get drinking water from open well with the premises of house in general., over 80.0 percent and 90.0 percent of household have access in most of the states and in India in N.F.H.S-3 and N.F.H.S-4 respectively. However, in most of the states and in India, over 95.0 percent of households have access to improved source of drinking water in N.F.H.S-5. This clearly indicates that most of people are protected from water born diseases with having access to improved source of drinking water.

According to the World Health Organization, open defecation is considered the most dangerous sanitation practice. Nearly 10 percent of all communicable diseases are associated with unsafe water and inadequate sanitation. In 1986, the Government of India initiated the Central Rural Sanitation Programme (CRSP) to enhance sanitation coverage in rural areas, aiming to improve the health and quality of life of rural residents, especially women, by providing privacy and dignity. The Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), a variant of CRSP, was introduced in 1999 with a community-driven and people-centric approach. Despite efforts to achieve the MDG Goal of 'Sanitation for All' by 2012, the TSC programs fell short. The 2011 Census revealed that almost half of Indian households (49.8 percent) practices open defecation, with 53 percent lacking toilet facilities in their premises. A study by 3 based on the 2011 Census indicated that central Indian states have higher rates of open defecation compared to the rest of the country. While a significant portion of the population lacks household toilets, a majority own mobile phones. Cultural norms, traditional beliefs, lack of awareness, and low education levels are cited as the main reasons for this unhygienic practice 1. The National Family Health Survey (N.F.H.S) defines toilet facilities as ”any non-shared toilet types, including flush/pour flush toilets connected to piped sewer systems, septic tanks, and pit latrines; ventilated improved pit (VIP)/biogas latrines; pit latrines with slabs; and twin pit/composting toilets”.

Table 3 depicts drastic improvement in households with any toilet facility in India and its states duringof N.F.H.S-1 of1992-93 and N.F.H.S-5 of 2019-20. In N.F.H.S-1, less than 25.0 percent of household have access to toilet in states like Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Odisha and Andhra Pradesh. About 30.0 percent households have no toilet facility in state like Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Odisha and Andhra Pradesh in N.F.H.S-2, while significant percent of households had access to toilet facility in majority of the states and in India during the period of N.F.H.S-3 and N.F.H.S-4. However, less than 25.0 percent of household had not having toilet facility in states like Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Odisha, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu in the period of N.F.H.S-5, it causes to practice open defecation. No access to sanitary toilet provisions led to no ensure of hygiene conditions. It reveals the extreme conditions that exist in these states there by riskiest sanitation practice may causes to water and air born diseases that leads ill health of people.

Exposure to indoor smoke, whether from cooking with solid fuels or smoking tobacco, can have adverse health effects. The risk of exposure to cooking smoke is higher when cooking is done indoors rather than in a separate structure or outdoors. India faces a significant challenge in providing safer cooking fuel options. The United Nations' efforts to combat extreme poverty may not reach their full potential unless countries prioritize bringing electricity and modern, safe cooking technologies to the billions of energy-poor individuals worldwide 13. Majority (71.5 percent) of households in India still rely on firewood, crop residue, cow dung cakes, or coal for cooking, which are common traditional fuels in rural areas 1. It is estimated that up to 70 percent of households in developing nations use wood, dung, and crop residues for cooking (International Energy Agency, 2002). The National Family Health Survey considers solid fuels for cooking to include “coal/lignite, charcoal, wood, straw/shrubs/grass, agricultural crop waste, and dung cakes”.

Table 4 reveals the substantial variations across in India and states in households with usedsolid fuel for cooking. Significant percent of households had used solid fuel for cooking during the period of N.F.H.S-1 and N.F.H.S-4 in India and many states. Even in N.F.H.S-5 period also, over 50.0 percent of households used solid fuel for cooking in India and its many states. Hence, burn of solid fuel for cooking causes to harmful air pollution that leads health impact on lungs related diseases especially among women and children.

Houses owned by the wealthy are considered 'pucca', indicating that they are constructed using durable materials such as stone, brick, and cement. On the other hand, the houses of the poor are categorized as 'Semi katcha' or 'katcha', as they are built using less durable materials like country tiles, stone rubbles, mud, and thatch, which are readily available locally. In rural areas of India, the design of houses is influenced by the availability of local building materials. The construction of houses in rural settings aims to fulfill the functional needs of the families residing in them. Approximately 12 percent of residential structures in India are temporary in nature. The eastern and central regions (West Bengal, Odisha, Bihar, Jharkhand, and Chhattisgarh) have a higher percentage of dilapidated houses used for residential purposes, while the southern and western states report the lowest percentage 1. According to the National Family Health Survey (N.F.H.S), “pucca houses are those constructed using high-quality materials for the floor, roof, and exterior walls”.

Table 5 reveals the substantial variations in households living in a pucca house in India and its states during the period of N.F.H.S-1 to N.F.H.S-5 and majority of households were not lived in pucca houses in many states. However, an improvement was observed in percent of households living in a pucca house in India and its states during the period of N.F.H.S-1 to N.F.H.S-5 due to construction of pucca for socio-cultural and economically marginalized by the governments under housing schemes. But still in N.F.H.S-5 period, 30.0 percent in India and over half of sampled households were not living in a pucca house in the states like Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya and Tripura. This clearly indicates that significant percent of households not had living in a pucca house in India and its states due to poor socio-economic, cultural and geographical reasons though pucca house is being the one of basic need of human being to live comfortably.

The measure of crowding known as "persons per room" takes into account all the rooms in a private dwelling and the number of people living in the household. A higher value for "persons per room" indicates a greater level of crowding. In India, approximately 3.9 percent of households do not have rooms specifically designated for residential purposes 1. According to the Census 2011 data, there are 43,813 families living in shared rooms, with nearly 40,000 of them located in urban Delhi. This data clearly highlights a significant proportion of the lower middle class residing in shared rooms

within the city's population.

Table 6 reveals the significant variations across in India and its states in mean number of persons per room used for sleeping during N.F.H.S 1 of 1992-93 to N.F.H.S-5 of 2019-21. On an average 2.5 mean number of persons per room used for sleeping in India and in many states. However, over 2.5 mean number of persons per room used for sleeping in states like Delhi, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Mizoram, Maharashtra, AndhraPradesh, Kerala Andhra Pradesh, and highest being 3.0 mean number of persons in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat in N.F.H.S-5 period. In states with higher mean number of persons per room used for sleeping can be problems such as individual privacies, congested and health issues especially such as the period of Covid-19 etc.