The Permanent Settlement of 1793, known as the Zamindari System, was a land revenue policy introduced by the British East India Company. Lord Cornwallis, the Governor-General, implemented this system in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. It marked a very important change in the management of land revenue in India.
Background
The Permanent Settlement emerged after the British East India Company gained control over Bengal post the Battle of Buxar in 1764. The Company faced challenges in revenue collection, marked by corruption and inefficiency. The Bengal famine of 1770 brought into light these issues. In 1776, Philip Francis proposed a permanent settlement, which Cornwallis later formalised.
Proposal and Formation of Committee
Cornwallis, alongside officials like Sir John Shore and James Grant, formed a committee to explore the proposal. Cornwallis favoured granting zamindars ownership rights, believing it would encourage agricultural improvements. The focus was on simplifying revenue collection through fewer intermediaries.
Areas Covered
The Permanent Settlement initially covered about 19% of British-ruled territory. It began in Bengal and Bihar, later extending to Orissa, Banaras, and parts of northern Madras. The system was not uniformly applied across all British territories in India.
Features of the Permanent Settlement
The Permanent Settlement introduced several key features:
- Fixed Land Tax: A ten-year tax agreement was established in 1790, made permanent in 1793.
- Revenue Sharing: Zamindars paid a fixed tax of 10/11 of the revenue to the Company, retaining 1/10th.
- Land Ownership Rights: Zamindars could sell, mortgage, or transfer land, with inheritance rights for heirs.
- Tenant Control: Zamindars could seize tenant property for unpaid rent without court approval.
- Limited Government Intervention: The British adopted a non-interventionist policy in zamindar-tenant relations.
- Patta System: Zamindars issued pattas (lease agreements) to tenants, detailing land area and rent.
Merits of the Permanent Settlement
The system had several advantages:
- Effective Administration: Local zamindars understood agricultural practices better, leading to improved governance.
- Stable Revenue Source: The fixed revenue provided certainty for the British government’s income.
- Sense of Security: The fixed nature of the system assured zamindars and tenants of their rights.
- Investment Incentives: Ownership rights encouraged zamindars to invest in land improvements.
Demerits of the Permanent Settlement
Despite its merits, the Permanent Settlement had drawbacks:
- Absentee Landlordism: High revenue rates led to many zamindars selling estates, creating absentee landlords.
- Subinfeudation of Land: Zamindars subdivided estates into smaller plots to meet revenue demands.
- Exploitation of Peasants: Zamindars often exploited tenants, demanding high rents and evicting them for non-payment.
- Neglect of Land Improvements: Zamindars focused on rent extraction rather than agricultural enhancement.
- No Scope for Change: The fixed revenue hindered the Company’s ability to raise funds for administration.
Impacts of the Permanent Settlement
The Permanent Settlement had deep effects on various stakeholders:
Impact on Farmers
Farmers faced oppressive conditions. They paid high rents to zamindars, often leading to debt. Failure to pay rent resulted in eviction, leaving many without land.
Impact on Zamindars
Zamindars struggled to meet the fixed revenue demands. Those unable to pay lost their zamindaris. This financial pressure discouraged investments in land improvements.
Impact on the Company
Initially, the Permanent Settlement ensured regular income for the British East India Company. However, the fixed revenue eventually limited the Company’s financial flexibility.
Land Revenue Policies in British India
During British rule, three primary land tenure systems existed –
- Zamindari System: Introduced by Cornwallis, it fixed land rights without occupancy rights for cultivators.
- Ryotwari System: Developed in southern India, it allowed farmers to pay revenue directly to the state.
- Mahalwari System: Introduced in the early 19th century, it collected revenue from villages as a single unit.
The Ryotwari System
The Ryotwari System emerged as a response to the challenges of the Zamindari System. Under this system, individual farmers (ryots) paid revenue directly to the state. They retained rights to sell or lease their land, as long as they paid rent. It was first implemented in Tamil Nadu and later extended to other regions.
Issues with the Ryotwari System
While the Ryotwari System eliminated intermediaries, it had its own challenges. Revenue officials often exploited farmers, leading to evictions. Moneylenders also took advantage of the system, further burdening cultivators.
The Mahalwari System
The Mahalwari System was introduced by Holt Mackenzie in 1822. It collected revenue from villages as a collective unit, known as a Mahal. This system was designed to revise revenue periodically rather than fix it permanently.
Issues with the Mahalwari System
The Mahalwari System faced criticism for faulty surveys and corruption. Revenue collection often exceeded the amount collected, rendering it inefficient and ineffective.
Other Land Tenure Systems
Several other systems existed alongside the main three:
- Taluqdari System: In Oudh, taluqdar referred to landholders. It created dependent taluqs under zamindars.
- Malguzari System: Prevalent in Central Provinces, it allowed revenue farmers to hold proprietary rights.
