Land Revenue Systems in British India – Zamindari, Ryotwari and Mahalwari (Modern History of India)

Indian History Notes for APSC, UPSC & other Exams

Tax from the land was a major source of revenue for the kings and emperors from ancient times. But the ownership pattern of land had witnessed changes over centuries. During Kingship, land was divided into Jagirs, Jagirs were alloted to Jagirdars, these Jagirdars split the land they got and allocated to sub-ordinate Zamindars. Zamindars made peasants cultivate the land, in-return collected part of their revenue as tax.

Land Revenue Systems in British India :

Zamindari System
  • Zamindari System was introduced by Cornwallis in 1793 through Permanent Settlement Act.
  • It was introduced in provinces of Bengal, Bihar, Orissa and Varanasi.
  • Also known as Permanent Settlement System.
  • Zamindars were recognized as owner of the lands. Zamindars were given the rights to collect the rent from the peasants.
  • The realized amount would be divided into 11 parts. 1/11 of the share belongs to Zamindars and 10/11 of the share belongs to East India Company.

APSC Prelims 2020 Test Series

Ryotwari System
  • Ryotwari System was introduced by Reed and Thomas Munro in 1820.
  • Major areas of introduction include Madras, Bombay, parts of Assam and Coorgh provinces of British India.
  • In Ryotwari System the ownership rights were handed over to the peasants. British Government collected taxes directly from the peasants.
  • The revenue rates of Ryotwari System were 50% where the lands were dry and 60% in irrigated land.
  • It was adopted in 51% of the total area under British rule that is in state of Malabar, Coimbatore, Madras, Assam, and Madurai and later it was extended to Maharashtra and East Bengal.
  • The state demand was fixed in cash and had no connection with actual yields. Besides, the revenue fixed was one of the highest in modern period, at 55 percent.
  • The taxes were directly collected by the government. It established a direct relationship between the government and the ryot (cultivator).
  • Farmers had the right to sell, mortgage and lease the land but had to pay their taxes on time. If they failed to pay taxes, they were evicted from the land.

Reasons for the Adoption of Ryotwari System

  • The British officials believed that there are no zamindars or feudal lords with large estates in these areas. So it was difficult for the British to implement the zamindari system.
  • The zamindari system was oppressive for the peasants and led to frequent agrarian revolts. The government wanted to avoid these situations. It also hoped that by introducing ryotwari system, the purchasing power of peasants would increase, which would increase the demands for British goods in India.

Impact of Land Revenue System Under Ryotwari System

  • The peasants did not benefit from this land revenue system and felt that smaller zamindars we are replaced by one giant zamindar, the British government. The farmers were forced to pay land revenue even during the famines otherwise they were forced to evict the land.
  • Further, the land revenue was very high, which led to the impoverishment of farmers.
  • A major drawback of this system was over assessment of crop yields.
Mahalwari System
  • Mahalwari system was introduced in 1833 during the period of William Bentick.
  • It was introduced in Central Province, North-West Frontier, Agra, Punjab, Gangetic Valley, etc of British India.
  • The Mahalwari system had many provisions of both the Zamindari System and Ryotwari System.
  • In this system, the land was divided into Mahals. Each Mahal comprises one or more villages.
  • Ownership rights were vested with the peasants.
  • The villages committee was held responsible for collection of the taxes.

Land Reforms in India After Independence

Zamindari Abolition Act was passed by UP, Tamil Nadu, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, etc. Surplus lands were confiscated from zamindars. Later Land Ceilings Act was passed by different states, fixing an upper limit for private land holdings of a family. Land reforms was under taken but implementation was far from satisfaction.