Land Revenue Systems in Colonial India: The Devastating Impact of Ryotwari, Mahalwari, and Permanent Settlement in (1300 Words)
Introduction
Land revenue systems were the methods of revenue administration by the British Indian government to boost agricultural production and produce steady flows of revenue. These systems have created long-lasting impressions on the socio-economic formations in rural India.
There are three very significant land revenue systems put up by the British:
Permanent Settlement
Ryotwari System
Mahalwari System
Each system reflected certain features and connotations for land ownership, taxations, as well as the agrarian community. Here are points of a detailed research on these systems.
Permanent Settlement (1793)
Background:-
Introduced by Lord Cornwallis in 1793 by the Permanent Settlement Act
Initially introduced in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, and later to the northern Madras Presidency and parts of Varanasi.
It was a treaty between the British and the landowners or Zamindars to permanently fix the land revenue .
Major Features:-
Revenue Collection by Zamindars:- The British made the Zamindars owners of the land and required them to collect revenue from the peasants.
Permanent Revenue:- The revenue demand on Zamindars was permanently fixed. They were given the liability to pay a certain portion of the total revenue collected ( normally 89%).
Inherited Rights:- The rights of Zamindars were hereditary in nature. As long as they paid the fixed revenue to the British government, they could retain the land.
Transferability of Land Ownership:- Zamindars were allowed to sell or transfer land; thereby, it was also a commercializable commodity.
Advantages:-
Established stability for the British government as they received a fixed and ensured revenue.
Created a class of loyal and rich Zamindars who followed the rule of British.
Disadvantages:-
Exploitation of Peasants:- Zamindars used to exploit peasants as they would enhance rent without considering their agricultural production.
No Land Improvement:- Since the assessment was permanent, Zamindars had no motive to invest in farming or irrigation.
Alienation of Lands:- Many Zamindars defaulted their payment and lands were alienated from them but peasants were evicted for the non-payment of rent.
Widening Inequality:-The system established a Zamindar class that was rich at the cost of poor peasants.
Impact
Forced creation of a landed aristocracy that held large land tracts.
Only further widened socio-economic differences as Zamindars lived in prosperity whereas peasants remained in poverty.
Eventually caused extreme agrarian distress and periodic peasant revolts.
Ryotwari System (1792)
Background:-
Introduced by Sir Thomas Munro in 1820 in the Madras Presidency and later extended to Bombay and parts of Assam .
Unlike the Zamindari system, this was a direct settlement between the government and the cultivator (ryot).
Main Features:-
Direct Relationship with Cultivators:- The revenue was settled directly with the ryots (peasants) who were considered to be the owners of the land.
Revenue Based on Estimate:- The revenue was pegged at periodic intervals, most after every 30 years, considering the land’s quality and type of crops raised.
Individual Ownership:- The ryots were regarded as individual owners and were taxed directly to the government.
No Intermediaries:- Unlike Permanent Settlement, there were no intermediaries such as Zamindars between the farmers and the government.
Advantages:-
Ownership Rights:- The ryots had the right to the ownership of their lands and could sell or transfer them at their discretion.
Reward for Agricultural Development:- Since they were the owners of the land, they had an incentive to increase the yield of the same land by better agricultural development.
Minimization of Exploitation:- Since the interference of Zamindars was absent, the exploitation was relatively less than that in the Permanent Settlement.
Demerits:-
Revenue demand often was too high, leaving the ryots in distress and indebted.
Periodic reassessment of revenue gave it a great degree of uncertainty to the ryots, besides, at times it became unfair and arbitrary.
During droughts or famines, the ryots were unable to pay the high taxes raised on them, in many cases selling land or entering into the trap of moneylenders.
Small State Investment in Agriculture: Although the ryots owned land, the British government did very little for agricultural infrastructure, irrigation, or technology.
Impact:-
The Ryotwari system had formed a class of small landholders but at the cost of vulnerability to natural calamities and to be taxed.
It resulted in peasants becoming debt-ridden, especially in regions prone to famines and furthered rural poverty.
Mahalwari System (1833)
Background:-
Introduced by Holt Mackenzie in 1822 and amended by William Bentinck in 1833.
Applied mainly in North-Western Provinces (modern-day Uttar Pradesh), Punjab, and some parts of Central India
It was meant to be midway between the Permanent Settlement and the Ryotwari system.
Important Features:-
Collective Ownership:- Income under the Mahalwari system was collected from a group of villages or a village unit called a Mahal.
Periodical Collection:- Land revenue was collected periodical, normally after 20 or 30 years, based on the gross produce of the village.
Lambardar’s Duty:- The duty of land revenue payment was put on the entire community of the village or headman or Lambardar. The Lambardar acts as an intermediary of government and the village.
Common Land Ownership:- The land was owned by the village community and its revenue was governed and determined by the group’s agricultural yields.
Advantages:-
Shared Burden:- The shared burden of paying the revenue gave a feeling of solidarity and cooperation between the villagers.
Flexibility:- Since this is an annual assessment, there is some flexibility in it because the revenue demand can be sent with little change made according to the yield of the land.
Engagement of Village Institutions:- The formal village institutions were maintained. There was considerable exercise of governance and decision-making by the village elders and headmen.
Drawbacks:-
Arbitrary Appraisals:- Revenue appraisals were arbitrary and prone to corruption by local leaders.
Village community burden:- The revenue payment rested with the entire community, and in case one farmer did not make the payment, other farmers were liable to supplement such deficiency.
Few incentives to improve individual plots:- Lands were owned in common; thus the individual farmer had little incentive to spend time and energy on plot improvement as any profit generated was divided amongst the whole village.
Extraction by Village Headmen:- The Lambardar sometimes exploited his situation and took a share of the revenue off the villagers’ backs
Consequences:-
The Mahalwari system consolidated the communitarian structure of rural India but also led to heavy exploitation and mishandling at the local level.
Like other two, it also led to the rural depressions and the weakening of the agricultural economy under British rule.
Comparison of the Three Systems
Feature Permanent Settlement Ryotwari System Mahalwari System
Introduced By Lord Cornwallis Sir Thomas Munro Holt Mackenzie, William Bentinck
Area of Implementation Bengal, Bihar, Orissa Madras, Bombay, Assam North-Western Provinces, Punjab
Land Ownership Zamindars (Intermediaries) Individual Ryots (Cultivators) Village Community
Revenue Appraisal Fixed Revenue, Permanent Periodic Reassessment Periodic Reassessment
Collection of Revenue Through Zamindars Directly from Ryots Through Village Headman (Lambardar)
Important Questions Zamindars oppressed the peasants, Neglecting agriculture PDS 243 Heavy taxes, Debt trap, Vulnerability to natural calamities Collective liability, Arbitrary assessment
Conclusion:-
The permanent system of land revenue introduced by the British-the Permanent Settlement, Ryotwari, and Mahalwari-remained considerably in force during India’s rural society. While each was aimed at extracting revenue for the colonial government, they usually ended up victimizing the farmers and creating much poverty in the countryside. This led to Zamindars getting rich but peasants becoming poor. The ownership rights were given to the ryots under the Ryotwari System, which exposed them to heavy taxations and debt trap.
In the Mahalwari System collective responsibility was introduced but this also led to exploitation of village institutions. These systems altogether defined the path towards the agricultural development of India and led to the serious agrarian distress which ignited discontentment and resistance against the colonial rule.
Also Read :- The Dutch East in India: A Forgotten Chapter of Colonialism (17th century)