By state and union territory
Body-measurement indicators as published, state by state — from two different surveys, kept clearly apart, each with its year attached.
Two surveys, fifteen years apart, never merged
36states & UTs
36 states and union territories have NFHS-5 (2019–21) body-measurement indicators. 29 of them also have a published mean adult height — from 2005–06, because nothing newer exists at state level.
The two are never mixed into one figure on this site, and no state's number has been estimated from its neighbours.
All 36 states and union territories
Mean adult height by state — 2005–06
Ranked by male mean height. 7 states and union territories are absent from this table because no mean height has ever been published for them; they are not estimated here.
| State / UT | పురుషులు (సెం.మీ.) | స్త్రీలు (సెం.మీ.) | పురుషులు (అడుగులు-అంగుళాలు) |
|---|---|---|---|
| పంజాబ్ | 168.6 | 154.7 | 5'6" |
| హర్యానా | 168.1 | 154.9 | 5'6" |
| Rajasthan | 167.2 | 154.5 | 5'6" |
| Jammu & Kashmir | 167.0 | 154.4 | 5'6" |
| Kerala | 166.6 | 152.9 | 5'6" |
| Delhi | 165.8 | 154.0 | 5'5" |
| Gujarat | 165.7 | 152.6 | 5'5" |
| Madhya Pradesh | 165.6 | 152.6 | 5'5" |
| Himachal Pradesh | 165.5 | 153.7 | 5'5" |
| Karnataka | 165.3 | 152.6 | 5'5" |
| Maharashtra | 165.1 | 151.9 | 5'5" |
| గోవా | 164.9 | 152.5 | 5'5" |
| ఉత్తరాఖండ్ | 164.9 | 152.7 | 5'5" |
| Tamil Nadu | 164.6 | 152.5 | 5'5" |
| Uttar Pradesh | 164.3 | 150.7 | 5'5" |
| Andhra Pradesh | 164.2 | 151.7 | 5'5" |
| బీహార్ | 163.4 | 150.5 | 5'4" |
| ఛత్తీస్గఢ్ | 163.4 | 151.3 | 5'4" |
| Manipur | 163.2 | 151.9 | 5'4" |
| పశ్చిమ బెంగాల్ | 163.2 | 150.8 | 5'4" |
| అస్సాం | 163.0 | 150.5 | 5'4" |
| Nagaland | 163.0 | 152.8 | 5'4" |
| ఒడిశా | 162.9 | 151.0 | 5'4" |
| జార్ఖండ్ | 162.5 | 150.0 | 5'4" |
| Mizoram | 162.4 | 151.8 | 5'4" |
| Arunachal Pradesh | 161.7 | 151.0 | 5'4" |
| Tripura | 161.5 | 149.7 | 5'4" |
| Sikkim | 159.8 | 151.2 | 5'3" |
| మేఘాలయ | 157.9 | 149.3 | 5'2" |
మూలం·Mamidi RS et al., Food and Nutrition Bulletin 2011;32(1):23-34, Tables 1 and 2 - mean height of adults aged 20-49, NFHS-3 (2005-06)·రాష్ట్ర సగటు వయోజన ఎత్తు, క్షేత్రస్థాయి సర్వే 2005–06·జూలై 2026న సమీక్షించాం
Full citation: Mamidi RS et al., Food and Nutrition Bulletin 2011;32(1):23-34, Tables 1 and 2 - mean height of adults aged 20-49, NFHS-3 (2005-06) Paper.
These figures are from 2005–06 and are the most recent state-level mean heights published anywhere this site could verify. Adult heights in India have not been re-published at state level since, so do not read this table as describing 2026.
NFHS-5 nutritional status by state — 2019–21
These are current. They are also the indicators NFHS actually publishes, which do not include a mean height.
| State / UT | Women <145 cm (%) | BMI, women | BMI, men | Women <18.5 (%) | Men <18.5 (%) | Women ≥25 (%) | Men ≥25 (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andaman & Nicobar Islands | 6.3 | 24.2 | 25.0 | 9.4 | 4.0 | 38.1 | 45.3 |
| Andhra Pradesh | 9.5 | 23.8 | 22.9 | 14.8 | 16.5 | 36.3 | 31.1 |
| Arunachal Pradesh | 11.7 | 23.2 | 23.4 | 5.7 | 4.9 | 23.9 | 27.6 |
| అస్సాం | 14.4 | 21.7 | 22.1 | 17.7 | 13.4 | 15.2 | 16.2 |
| బీహార్ | 17.8 | 21.3 | 21.4 | 25.6 | 21.6 | 16.0 | 14.7 |
| చండీగఢ్ | 8.6 | 24.5 | 23.6 | 13.0 | 15.1 | 44.0 | 34.4 |
| ఛత్తీస్గఢ్ | 12.4 | 21.3 | 21.7 | 23.1 | 17.4 | 14.1 | 15.0 |
| Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu | 15.5 | 22.2 | 22.1 | 25.1 | 18.2 | 26.9 | 21.4 |
| Delhi | 10.3 | 24.5 | 24.0 | 10.0 | 9.1 | 41.4 | 38.0 |
| గోవా | 6.9 | 23.7 | 23.2 | 13.8 | 12.5 | 36.1 | 32.6 |
| Gujarat | 8.3 | 22.0 | 21.9 | 25.2 | 20.9 | 22.7 | 20.0 |
| హర్యానా | 5.2 | 23.4 | 23.0 | 15.1 | 14.5 | 33.1 | 28.3 |
| Himachal Pradesh | 5.3 | 23.2 | 23.1 | 13.9 | 11.8 | 30.4 | 30.6 |
| Jammu & Kashmir | 7.3 | 23.6 | 23.8 | 5.2 | 4.3 | 29.4 | 31.7 |
| జార్ఖండ్ | 18.1 | 21.0 | 21.8 | 26.2 | 17.1 | 11.9 | 15.1 |
| Karnataka | 10.1 | 23.0 | 23.2 | 17.2 | 14.3 | 30.2 | 30.9 |
| Kerala | 4.5 | 24.1 | 23.8 | 10.1 | 10.0 | 38.2 | 36.4 |
| Ladakh | 11.6 | 23.6 | 24.2 | 4.4 | 2.1 | 28.3 | 37.8 |
| Lakshadweep | 5.4 | 23.6 | 24.0 | 8.0 | 5.5 | 33.5 | 41.3 |
| Madhya Pradesh | 8.7 | 21.5 | 21.5 | 23.0 | 20.8 | 16.6 | 15.6 |
| Maharashtra | 10.0 | 22.3 | 22.6 | 20.8 | 16.2 | 23.5 | 24.7 |
| Manipur | 5.9 | 23.8 | 23.3 | 7.2 | 8.0 | 34.1 | 30.3 |
| మేఘాలయ | 18.2 | 21.7 | 22.1 | 10.8 | 9.0 | 11.5 | 13.9 |
| Mizoram | 6.1 | 23.2 | 23.6 | 5.3 | 5.1 | 24.2 | 32.1 |
| Nagaland | 4.4 | 22.0 | 22.9 | 11.1 | 7.5 | 14.4 | 23.9 |
| ఒడిశా | 14.5 | 22.1 | 22.3 | 20.8 | 15.3 | 23.0 | 22.2 |
| Puducherry | 7.5 | 25.2 | 24.3 | 9.0 | 11.1 | 46.3 | 43.3 |
| పంజాబ్ | 4.8 | 24.3 | 23.4 | 12.7 | 12.5 | 40.8 | 32.3 |
| Rajasthan | 3.9 | 21.4 | 21.9 | 19.6 | 14.0 | 12.9 | 15.0 |
| Sikkim | 9.9 | 23.9 | 24.3 | 5.8 | 4.9 | 34.8 | 36.3 |
| Tamil Nadu | 9.1 | 24.3 | 23.8 | 12.6 | 12.1 | 40.5 | 37.1 |
| తెలంగాణ | 12.6 | 22.9 | 23.3 | 18.8 | 16.3 | 30.1 | 32.4 |
| Tripura | 18.2 | 22.3 | 22.6 | 16.2 | 12.4 | 21.6 | 23.5 |
| Uttar Pradesh | 14.8 | 22.2 | 21.9 | 19.0 | 18.0 | 21.4 | 18.5 |
| ఉత్తరాఖండ్ | 7.2 | 23.1 | 22.7 | 13.9 | 16.2 | 29.8 | 27.1 |
| పశ్చిమ బెంగాల్ | 14.9 | 22.5 | 22.0 | 14.8 | 15.1 | 22.7 | 16.2 |
మూలం·NFHS-5 (2019-21) India Report Vol. 1, Table 10.20.1 (women) and Table 10.20.2 (men), age 15-49, by state/union territory·NFHS-5, fieldwork 2019–21·జూలై 2026న సమీక్షించాం
Every figure is as published. Nothing here is modelled, ranked against an unpublished baseline, or interpolated between states.
Why two tables and not one ranking
- Keep the instruments apart: NFHS-5 (2019–21) publishes nutritional-status indicators; the only citable state mean heights come from a peer-reviewed analysis of the 2005–06 round.
- Print the fieldwork year in the column heading, not in a footnote. A 2005–06 ranking read as current is the commonest error on this topic.
- Never convert a threshold count into a mean. "Women under 145 cm" is an obstetric-risk marker, and it cannot be turned back into an average.
- Omit a state rather than back-fill it. Telangana and Ladakh did not exist as separate units in 2005–06, so their height cells are empty.
NFHS-5 (2019–21) → nutritional-status indicators 2005–06 analysis → state mean adult height the two are never added together
ప్రశ్నలు
Which Indian state has the tallest people?
On the only state-level mean adult heights this site could verify — a peer-reviewed analysis of the 2005–06 NFHS-3 measurements — the table below ranks every state for which a figure was published. It is two decades old, it covers 29 of 36 states and union territories, and no newer state-level mean has been published since. Treating a 2005–06 ranking as current would be wrong, which is why the year is in the column heading.
Does NFHS publish average height by state?
No. The National Family Health Survey measures height directly, but its published tables give the percentage of women aged 15–49 below 145 cm and mean BMI rather than a mean height, and it publishes no male height indicator at all. Sites showing an "NFHS average height by state" table are showing something else, usually without saying so.
Why are some states missing a height figure?
Because the 2005–06 analysis predates them or did not cover them — Telangana and Ladakh did not exist as separate units in 2005–06, and several smaller union territories were not reported. Back-filling Telangana from undivided Andhra Pradesh would be inventing a measurement, so those cells are empty.
State indicators from the National Family Health Survey; state mean heights from a peer-reviewed analysis of the 2005–06 round. Both cited in full on each state page. General information only — not medical advice. Growth varies enormously between healthy individuals; a single measurement means little. Discuss any concern about a child's growth with a paediatrician. See data & method ఈ సైట్లో వాడిన ప్రతి మూలం, సర్వే రౌండ్ మరియు రౌండింగ్ నియమం కోసం.
The people behind these sites
Follow the build
This site and nine others like it are built and photographed by two people: Amit Sharma — behind the build; Geeta Patel — the poses, demonstrated. New work goes up on Instagram and Facebook before it reaches a page here.
Amit Sharma
@amitsharmaofficial
Instagram
Geeta Patel
@geetapatelnz
Instagram
Geeta Patel
GeetaPatelYoga
Facebook
Following changes nothing here — every page stays open, with no account and no wall.
