8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

1/21

UNIT 2 ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OFLAND TENURE SYSTEM S IN INDIA

Contents2.0 Objectives2.1 Introduction2.2 Land Tenure System: Historical Context

2 2 1 Land Tenure Systems in Ancient India2 2 2 Land Tenure Systems in Medieval India2 2 3 Impact of Colonialism on Land Tenure System

2.3 Land Reforms in Independent India2 3 1 Problems in Land Revenue System in Pre Independent India2 3 2 Initiatives for Mitigating the Problem of Exploitative System

2.4 Let Us Sum up2.5 Key Words2.6 Suggested Readings2 0 OBJECTIVESAfter reading this unit you will be able to:

explain the historical context of land tenure system in India;understand the system of land tenure in Ancient and Medieval India;study the impact of colonialism on land tenure system in India;identify the problems related to h d enure system in pre independent India;andrealize the initiatives taken for removal of exploitative system.

2 1 INTRODUCTIONLand tenure system explains the traditional or legal rights individual or groups ofindividuals have on land and the social relationships among the rural population thatemerges from such land rights. It has two constituents namely the system of landownership and secondly the system of labour organization in rural regions. Thusdepending on the local circumstances and prevailing conditions many land tenuresystems have developed in different countries in varying socio-economic milieu.These systems have been influenced by local factors such as socio-cultural valuespolitical ideologies level of technological advancements population trend etc. on theone hand and natural conditions as for instance climate soil conditions topographythat have evolved over the period of time on the other. Hence there has beenperiodical and continual process of change that has given rise to a different landtenute system. Thus a specific land tenure system is an institutional frameworkwithin which agricultural production takes place and people live in a defined lifestyleadapting to the gradual changes and demands of the prevailing social culturaleconlomical natural and political conditions.

Land tenure system in India has not been any different from those of the othercountries they too have been influenced by the surrounding environment changingwith the times and evolving gradually. Change in political setup from one era toanother has been accompanied by differing political thoughts ahd ideologies thathave influenced the system of land ownership and also the existing labour

18 organizations. What follows here is a systematic study of the various land tenure

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

2/21

systems in ancient and medieval India. Besides, we will t y to learn the system as Origin and Development ofit existed in colonial period and implications of this period on land tenure system. Land Tenure Systems inIndia2 2 LAND TENUR E SYSTEM HISTORICAL CONTEXTHere we w ill t y to study the history of land tenure sy stem in ancient and medievalIndia and also analyze influence of British Rele on the system.2 2 1 Land Tenure Systems in Ancient IndiaLand tenure system in ancient India is marked by gradual changes that has evolvedfrom common ownership to individual ownership. Since human beings used to m oveas tribal groups from place to place. Land was considered to be the gift of natureand no person in particular owned it. It was commonly used by all the membersof the tribal groups. At later stages, when m an started practicing settled agriculture,the concept of individual ownership developed . Agriculture in this period was in thetransitory stage of nomadic cultivation and settled agriculture.What follows in the coming paragraphs is a study of the gradual development ofland tenure system in ancient India.1 Vedic PeriodAt the settled agriculture stage it is believed that land was considered to belong tothe person who first cleared it. At times of peace, this system of establishing thetitle to landed property would have seemed a rational one. But in the transitorystage between nomadic, hunting and gathering and the establishment of settledagriculture, shifting nom adic) agriculture mus t have existed. Und er the nomadiclifestyle the only items owned by a tribe would have been the weapons used forhunting. As hunting had to be done in groups, the weapons would also have beenowned collectively.In the next stage of nomadic agriculture, the pieces of land that were cleared forcultivation would also have been held under the common ownership of the hibe.Only when settled agriculture became the mode, the practice of individual ownersh ipof land could have come into existence.It can be learnt from the Vedic literature that the Vedas prohibited land grants, andall property was under common ownership and the idea of gifting land to anyonewould have appeared unlikely. The tradition referred to in the Vedic text - Shatapathurahmana and in the Mahabharata suggests that land must not be given away evenon the plea of a sacrificial fee. The fact that land grants were being scoffed at,shows that up to the Mahabharata period dated around 9 B.C.E.) the idea thatland could be an object of sale and purchase had not yet been established. Thisattitude is in direct contrast to the regular practice of making land grants to Brahm insand noblemen, apart from land becoming an object of regular purchase and salewhich was the characteristic feature of later times.In the post Vedic period, land was no longer the common property and privateownership of land was gradually being established. Though the practice of landgrant had started, it was not readily accep ted by all and looked upon with an attitudeof indec is iveness . The Shatapatha rahmana and the Mahabha ra ta a rechronologically placed in the Post-Vedic period before the lir e of the big m onarchicalstates of Koshala and Magadha. In those days the sale, purchase and grants of landwas frowned at, as land had been held as common property. When individualowne rship finally come to be established, it had been linked w ith the labour responsiblefor m aking it cultivable, as can be un derstood from the statement in the. Manu smriti

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

3/21

Land Tenure Systems and Secondly, in those days social stratification and the caste system of the later daysgrarian Structure of Magadhan imperialism (i.e. after 500 B.C.E.) had yet not been established. Inthe tribal setup of the days of the Rig Veda (i.e. before 1500 B.C.E.) every malemember of a tribe had to hunt collectively. However, in the beginning, when agriculturewas taken up as prime occupation by the disintegrating tribal society of hunters,land was collectively owned. Thus, every member of the tribe seems to have hadan equal right to whatever the tribe produced collectively. Even the tribal chief didnot exert his powers, which was a common phenomenon of the monarchs of laterages. The Vedic king's authority was limited, that was evidence from the fact thatin the Atharva Veda, Indra was invoked to give the king's share (Bhaga) in thevillage. But in later times the king himself was stated to be the collector of his shareas mentioned by the Panchavimsa Brahmana.2 Land Ownership Rights as per ManusmritiAccording to Manusmriti Land belong to him who first cleared the timber and adeer to him who first wounded it. This couplet provides a clue to the understandingof a very important doctrine of ancient Indian economics. It is evident from thisstatement that to begin with the title to property of land was allied to the labour whomade it cultivable. Thus it can be stated that in a society where the title to propertyin land was linked to the labour who cleared it, practice of giving land grants as wellas sale and purchase of land would be considered strange as there existed vaststretch of freely available land which could be cleared and claimed by any person.With the settling of Aryans society in the Gangetic plains, the population graduallyincreased and the shortage of cultivable land began to be felt and frequent transferin the ownership of land was often resorted to. Transfer of land besides signifyingsettled agriculture, also shows that there was shortage of land. Change in ownershipof land from common to individual also affected the language. Meaning of wordssuch as Bhratru and Bhratrivya, meaning brother and brotherhood in AtharvaVeda, also changed to rival and rivalry. Thus it is evident that hostility was becomingcommon within Vedic Kulas (families) due to the ownership of land.The system of landholding also gradually underwent fundamental changes. In thebeginning, the whole tribe Gana)held the land that it cultivated. Then the ownershipgradually narrowed down to the Vamshasor blood relations which further branchedinto the Kulas or families. This narrowing down of ownership must have alsoaffected the size of the individual holdings. Tribal holding, which the entire tribeusad to work, must have been much bigger in size. Its fragmentation into separatefamily holdings must have naturally limited its size. It must have been further limitedin the subsequent period with the rise of the individual proprietary rights on land.Individual land ownership was also accompanied by the people's urge for possessinglarge tracts of land even it is was grabbed from others. In this way, the landedestates must have come into existence as a result of war between one kingdom byanother and the grabbing of land. The martial caste of the Kshatriyas would havebeen the main beneficiaries in this process. Yet another method of extending landownership was the Ashva-Medha Yagna performed by a king in order to expandhis territory and bring other lung under his sway. Such accumulation of land in thehands of a few landlords created a class of landlords and cultivators.3 Rise of the Big Monarchical States in the Ganges ValleyWith the formation of monarchical states and their capital cities which were the hubof mercantile activities, there emerged a class of absentee landlords who largelylived in the cities but had vast landed properties in rural areas. Such absenteelandlords are mentioned in the Pali text of Buddha's time. These absentee landlordshad landholdings relatively near the monarchical states of the Ganges valley, e.g.

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

4/21

of Koshala and Magadha their landholdings came to be integrated with the prosperingmercantile economy of these kingdoms. In the Pali texts we find mention of landlord-merchants like Anathapindaka and Kossiyagotta The state in whose territorythese landlord-merchants lived also gained in the form of increasing collection oftaxes and the general prosperity.In these monarchical states, the landlord-merchants played the role of intermediariesbetween the state and the actual tillers of the soil. Thus a nexus was establishedbetween the state and the landed aristocracy. But in the foothills of the Himalayanranges, which were outside the Gangetic monarchical states of Magadha and Koshala,the landed aristocracy was not under the sovereignty of any outside king. Thelandlords were their own rulers and had conglomerates of oligarchies. Such oligarchiesof the Mallas, Lichavis, Koliyas, etc. are mentioned in the Pali texts. These landholdingoligarchs were different from the absentee landlords of the plains as was the casein the Gangetic valley, in the sense that they were based on their landholdings, didnot have any significant mercantile contacts with the outside world and were notloyal to any King. These landlords were bound to one another in a tribal oligarchy,which neither gave taxes to the monarchies of the Ganges valley nor did theyacknowledge any sort of sovereignty of any outside monarch. Thus began thestruggle between the tribal oligarchies and the monarchical states. Right fromAjatashatru who ruled Magadha in the 6th Century B.C.E. during Buddha s timeup to the Nandas of the 4th century B.C.E. there were continuous struggles amongthe tribal oligarchies of the Himalayan foothills comprising the Mallas, Lichavis,Koliyas and some other tribes with the monarchical states of Koshala and Magadha.his struggle was the main cause for destruction of the independent tribal oligarchies.

The victory of the monarchies over the tribal oligarchies was also the victory of amore advanced and organised economy over the closed tribal economy. Land cameunder state supervision and the state adopted measures which siphoned off a largesegment of the produce as revenue to be collected in the royal treasury. Thisfurther increased the strength of the monarchical states. While the nexus betweenthe state and the large landholders was firmly established, the regions to the southof the Ganges valley viz., Madhya-desha and Dakshina-patha i.e. Central andSouthern India, were still outside the pale of Magadhan imperialism.4) ryan Migration to Southern IndiaIn the post Vedic period, some Aryan tribes had started migrating down into Centraland Southern India. This can be understood from recollection of the sage Agastyaleading the Aryans across the Vindhyas and that of Parshurama retrieving the landof Kerala from the sea. These immigrants had established pockets of settledagriculture and had mushroofiled into small kingdoms. The earlier non-Aryan settlersalready had their own kingdoms located in pockets of agriculture, throughout thecountry. But these kingdoms were relatively small and were separated from eachother by dense un-reclaimed forests. Along with this population pressure was beingfelt in the Ganges valley by the 4th century B.C.E. This was the general situationwhen Chandragupta Maurya established the country s first pan-Indian empire.5 The Raid of lexander the GreatIt was in this situation wherein the tribal oligarchies were battling the risingMonarchical States in the Ganges valley that Alexander and his Macedonian (Greek)phalanxes crossed the Hindukush into the Punjab region after overcoming thePersian Achameanian Empire. The kingdoms that Alexander faced in the Punjabwere similar in organization to the tribal oligarchies of the Hills of Mithila, north ofMagadha, rather than to the proper monarchies of Magadha and Koshala. The twomain tribal oligarch kingdoms in the Punjab were that of Taxila and Arratta ruledrespectively by Arnbastha, popularly known as Ambhi and king Pururava or Porus.While Ambhi decided that discretion was the better part of valour and made an

Origin and evelopmentLand Tenure Systems in

India

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

5/21

Land Tenure Systems andAgrarian tructure honourable comp romise with Alexander by joining forces with the invader againsthis compatriot Raja Pu rurava -who ruled the land between the Vipasha (Beas) andthe Vitasta (Jhelum).Pururava fought a devastating battle with Alexander on the banks of the Jhelum.Pururava was defeated, but he had so dernoralised the M acedonian army that itrefused to advance forward into India. Alexander retraced his steps after makingPururava his vassal but his campaign reduced substantially the might of theseoligarchies of Punjab, which could have posed a hurdle to the growing Mauryanempire.6 The Rise of MagadhaThree hundred years preceding Alexander's w hirlwind cam paign witness phenom enalgrowth of Magadha. The literary evidences show that it was one of the 16mahajanpadas, which marked the growth of polity of Ancient India during the lifeof Lord Budha 6thcentury B.C.E. Koshal was yet another rnahajanapada, whichwas ruled by kingS Prase njit during the same period. These two m ahajanapadaswere related to each other by matrimonial alliances. However, Magadh underAjatshatru coveted the kingdom of Koshal. Meanwhile, a sudden flood washed thearmy of Koshal away while it was camping on a riverbank. This disaster not onlydevoured the army but also king Presenjit's son prince Bimbsar who was comm anderof that ill-fated m y . Prasenjit could not bear this inordinate loss and died of grief.This episode presented Ajatshatru a much-awaited chance to bring Koshal underhis sw ay S oon, Ajatshzltru proclaimed his suzerainty over K oshal. This ev ent provedthe importance of Magadha's eventful growth of an empire and Magadhan powercontinued to grow till it became the unchallenged power in the Ganges valley.7 The NandasAround the 4th century B.C.E. the throne of Magadha was taken over by anambitious general named Mahapadma Nanda who w as a Shudra by caste. However,the Nandas were powerful and just kings. Mahapadma Nanda's grandson wasDhana Nanda, and he was ruling from Pataliputra when Alexander the Greatinvaded the Punjab. At that time, Dhana Nanda's kingdom stretched up to theGanga but did not include today's Western UP and Punjab. Hence, the kingdom ofMag adha has been referred n the Greek chronicles of Alexande r as that of theGangaridans.The Greeks, however, never reached Magadha. Among the Greeks who came withAlexander, there was a rumour that the Gangaridans were fiercer than the soldiersof Porus (Pururava) whom the Greeks had fought in the Punjab. The Greeks hadwon a very costly victory against Porus and since the Gangaridans were evenfiercer, the homesick Greek soldiers revolted against Alexander and refused toadvance beyond Punjab and Alexander had to retrace his steps from the Punjabitself.8 The MauryasThe M aurya empire was established by Chand ragupta Maurya soon after Alexander'sdeparture. Chandragupta, guided by his mentor, Chanakya, overthrew Dh ana Nanda,the last Nanda king and crowned himself the king of Magadha. Thus the firstknown political unification of India started when his army conquered virtually thewhole of India. The Maurya Empire, under him stretched from Karnataka toAfghanistan and from the river Indus to Bengal. He even attacked the GreekGovernor of the Punjab, Seleucus Nikator and defeated him. Subsequently a treatywas signed between Chandragupta and Seleucus whereby, Seleucus ceded thePunjab and Sindh to Chandragupta and also gave his daughter in marriage toChandragupta.

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

6/21

Revenue collection was now a different task than what it had been under the small Origin and evelopment ofpre-Mauryan kingdoms of the Ganges valley. This task was difficult as there was Land Tenure ystems inIndiadense forest separating the .isolated pockets of settled agriculture and surpluspopulation in the Ganges valley. Besides, there were also the aboriginal tribes thatroamed in the forests practicing shifting agriculture. Thus to bring the vast empireunder a dependable revenue collection system, the state had to undertake morefundamental efforts beyond simple revenue collection to ensure proper and systematiccollection of revenue.Arthashastra a Sanskrit classic on the principles of politico-economic organizationauthored by Chanakya, the principal adviser to the first Mauryan EmperorChandragupta, is the authoritative source that gives an idea of the Mauryan stateadministrative system. The Mauryan state became the central land clearing agencywith the objective of extending settled agriculture and breaking up the disintegratingremnants of the frontier hill tribes, whose members could serve as a useful sourceof providing labour-cultivators on these newly cleared forest lands.Mauryan agriculture had two types of landholdings. The first, the Rashtra type ofholding was the direct descendant of the holding of the former tribal oligarchies whohad been subjugated in pre-Mauryan times. The Rashtra landholding was to a largeextent independent of the state machinery in their internal functioning andadministration.Their only obligation was the regular payment of the Rashtra taxes to the state.The second type of landholding was of the Sita type was formed by clearingforestland with the help of the tribesmen, whose tribal way of life had beensystematically destroyed by the Mauryan statecraft. The Sita holding was resultof clearing up of forest land mainly with the labour of displaced tribesmen. Thisclearing up of forests opened contacts with tribes in areas still farther away whofaced in the process of disintegration the Mauryan state. This was the beginningof the margin of the monarchical revenue system and of settled agriculture. Thestate maintained a close control over the state owned Sita land which could not besold or transferred without special permission. This land was not made the propertyof the cultivator. It was leased to him for his lifetime and he could hold the leaseon condition that he cultivated the land and paid taxes. The penalty for non-cultivation was confiscation of the leased land. The insistence of the Mauryan stateinsisted on intensive cultivation with maximum results suggests that taxes in Mauryantimes bore a close proportionate relationship with the size of the crop. Henceinsistence on maximum results was in the interest of augmenting the state s revenuecollection. Work that could give rise to common tribal solidarity was not allowed.Even religious associations were restricted. Thus by prohibiting the establishment ofany public platform the Mauryan state totally eliminated all possibilities of anypopular resistance from the peasant masses.The Mauryan state s reluctance to take any responsibility of unproductive citizens,is evidenced by-the barring the entry of Buddhist and Jaina Bhikshus on these Sitalands before Ashoka, which was also aimed at preventing the conversion of peasantsto unproductive monks. According to the Arthashastra, there shall be no buildings,in villages, which could be used for sports and recreational activities, nor shallactors, dancers, singers, drummers, buffoons Vagjivana) and bards Kushilava)make any disturbance in the work of the villagers. These extremely strict measureswere enforced by establishing guarded frontiers for each of the isolated and disjointedagricultural villages called Janapadas. These internal frontiers served the purposeof toll and tax collection and for yercising control over the movements of peasants.This controlled regimen helped the Mauryas to have a highly centralized characterof the empire. This can be termed as the Mauryan socialism meaning state ownershipof the me Ins of production. Besides the agricultural land holdings, it also owned

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

7/21

Land Tenure Systems andgrarian Structure warehouses, shipyards and mines. In short, the Mauryan economy functioned notonly without intermediary revenue collectors but also largely without individualowners of means of production in the heavy and basic industries of those days. Thestate was by far the biggest owner of the means of production and organiser of thenormal economic functioning.New settlements were established and declining ones were reinforced by draftingsurplus settlers from the overpopulated area of the Ganges valley. Generally thelower castes were encouraged to move out of the Ganges valley and settle in thenew agricultural settlements. Land was leased out to them. In order to make thevirgin land cultivable, the state allowed remission of taxes for a few initial years andother concessions by way of supplies of cattle, seeds and agricultural instruments,which they were required to repay later. But these cultivators could sell off no land,they were supposed to cultivate it and give the revenue to the state. Unlike Jagirdarsof the medieval ages the Mauryan revenue collectors were paid employees of thestate. Hence there were two kind of people, one the upper citizenry and the otherthe proletariat who worked on the Sita state owned farms but did not have a claimon the land they cultivated. These cultivators of the Sita land were termed theardha sitikas or half share-croppers as they were entitled to only a portion of thecrop they reaped, with the rest going to the state as revenue. These relations werebasically feudal in nature and were preserved by the various dynasties that followedthe Mauryas.9 Pre Gupta Periodn this period, unlike the Maurya period, the state farms were not heard of and

instead land seems to have been mainly in possession of individual farmers. BothGautama and Manu approve of separate households for brothers stating that it hassome religious merits; which in turn promoted individual possession of land. TheDivyavadana refers to individual farmers in large numbers, working hard inagricultural cultivation. Thus state efforts seem to have been replaced by individualefforts. The Milinda Panho refers to these individuals who cleared the forests andtook steps for making the land cultivable and since they brought the land under use,they were recognized as owner of the land. Though the practice of making grantsof cultivated land had already come into vogue, the underlying idea of making grantsof uncultivated land to the Brahmins was to make it arable.However Milinda Panho recognizes the king s ownership over all the towns,seaports, mines, etc. which are situated on the earth, indicating general temtorialsovereignty. Hence state ownership was not entirely absent and on account of thisauthority, the king could appoint overlords of villages and janapadas. This can alsobe shown from the inscriptions of Satavahana rulers.i) Land Tenure System of Satavahanas In the ~at avahana ingdom, thesubjects possessed land individually because they could give away plots of land

of varying size to Buddhist monks. But it is not clear whether they could selland purchase land for secular purposes. In spite of flourishing economy, thereare no instances of the purchase of land by merchants for increasing their landholding and property. This seems to have limited the scope of individualownership. The merchants and lay worshippers could freely dispose of theirland only for religious purposes.In India, the earliest epigraphic evidence of land grant belongs to the firstcentury BC, when a village was granted by the Satavahanas in Maharashtrato the priests as a gift on the occasion of the asvamedha sacrifice. Suchgrants were free from taxes but strangely enough, administrative rights wereabandoned by the Satavahana ruler Gautamiputra Satakarni in second centuryAD in the grant he made to the Buddhist monks in western Deccan. The land

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

8/21

officials or interfered with by the district police. Grants were intended for Origin and Development offulfilling religious obligations. However, there are evidence which show that Land fenure Systems inIndiasome grants were meant to get the land cultivated. An inscription from 130AD states that if the land is not cultivated the village is not settled.

ii Land Tenure System of Sakas Very little information is available about theland tenure system of Sakas. The most famous Saka ruler Rudradaman I in150 AD claims to have repaired the famous Sudarsana lake without havingburdened his subjects with forced labour, benevolences and taxes on theirfruits and flowers, implying thereby that the peasants were relieved of theseoppressive taxes for the time being.iii Land Tenure System of Kushanas Information about the land tenure systemof Kushanas who ruled from the Oxus to Banaras is practically negligible.However it is learnt from the inscriptions that the Brahmins officiating in thesacrifice were given a village, probably in the Allahabad region. Kanishka and

his several successors were enthusiastic champions of Buddhism but there areno records, which tell that they granted land to Buddhist monks. This creditgoes first to the Satavahanas though they were Brahmins and champions ofBrahmanisms. May be the Kushanas introduced the aksayanivi system ofland tenure, which implied perpetual endowment of land revenues. It appearsthat grant of land according to this system that became popular during theGupta period, had already begun under the Kushanas in the first two centuriesof the Christian era.

10 Gupta PeriodIn this period it is argued by many that the state was the exclusive owner of land.This is supported by the Paharpur copper plate inscription of Buddhagupta whereit is stated that the emperor representing the state acquired the wealth as well asspiritual merit, when he made land grants. This obviously means that he was theowner of the land. There are also indirect evidence that elaborate official procedurehad to be undergone while obtaining land grants which also indicates that the kinghad the supreme ownership on land, otherwise he could not have transferredcomprehensive rights to the recipient. However even after the donation of land, theking had certain prerogative over the land. Thus, it appears that though the landbelong to the peasants but the king claimed its theoretical ownership.There were different land tenures in the Gupta period which is evident from Guptaland grant inscriptions. These are:i Nivi dhamzas Land endowment in perpetuity.ii Nivi dhamza aksayana perpetual endowment which a recipient could notalienate but could make use of the income accruing from it eternally.iii Aprada dhamza It means that a recipient had all rights to enjoy such aproperty but no right to make a further gift of the same and could only enjoythe interest and income from the endowed land, but had no administrative

rights.iv Bhumichchhidranyaya This meant rights of ownership as were acquired bya while making barren land cultivable for the first time and was free fromliability to pay rent for it.The first kind of trusteeship was prevalent in many parts of north and central India,but other kinds of trusteeship were probably followed mainly in the eastern part ofthe Gupta empire. There are a number of references in copper plates to land sale.During purchase of land, certain procedures were followed which are again evidenceof land transactions during this period. There were also certain grants which weregiven to spicific groups of people in a specific community or due to specific causes,these .were agrahara grants, devagrahara grants arid secular grants.

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

9/21

Gupta period also marks the beginning of subinfeudation. The Gupta grants fromgrarian Structure Bengal and eastern India do not authorize the beneficiary to alienate or grant hisrents or land to others. But the Indore grant of Skandagupta in central Indiaauthorizes the grantee to enjoy the land, cultivate it and get it cultivated, so long ashe observes the conditions of the grant. This shows that there were enough scopefor creating tenants on the donated land and this provides epigraphic evidence ofsubinfeudation which continued in fifth century AD and also in sixth and seventhcentury AD.There are many references to agriculture in this period. Apart from the statecultivators and individual cultivators, Brahmins, Buddhist, and aina Sanghas broughtwaste land under cultivation when these were donated to them as religiousendowments. There are also references to small agricultural land holdings whichwere cultivated by the owner himself with the help of family members. But therewere also some land holdings where the owner hired labour for its cultivation or letout the land to sharecroppers. Certain rules were also laid out that governed therelation, between the land owner and kred labour or the sharecropper. These ruleswere essentially to safeguard the interests of both the parties.11 Post Gupta PeriodThis periad is characterized by the emergence of a new agrarian economy, whichis attributed to the growing practice of land grants. This practice had its origin inthe pre-Gwpta period that grew in the Gupta era and became quite frequent in thepost-Gupta period. Though religious merit was thought to be the reason for makingthese land grants, the real reason was a serious crisis that affected the ancientsocial order. Land was granted to priests and officials in lieu of salaries andremuneration. This method had the advantage of putting the burden of collectingtaxes and maintaining law and order in the granted lands on the recipients i.e. thepriests and other officials. It also brought new land under cultivation. However, theland recipients could neither cultivate themselves nor collect revenues. Hence, thework of cultivation was given to peasants or sharecroppers, who were attached tothe land but did not legally own it. So these groups of people continued to work inthese lands and could not move from one village to another. Thus a new agrarianeconomy emerged with a new agrarian structure, which was characterized by:

Grant of barren as well as cultivable land;Transfer of to the grantees;Imposition of forced labour;Restriction on the movement of the peasants;Delegation of fiscal and criminal administrative power to the religiousbeneficiaries;Remuneration in the form of land grants t the officials;Growth of the rights of the grantees;Multiplicity of taxes;Growth of a complex revenue system; andWide regional variation in agrarian structure.

This also harked the origin and development of feudalism. Land grants given toBrahmins from first century AD onwards made their number considerably large innorthern India in the Gupta period and went on increasing afterwards. This in turncreated a olass of landlords unevenly all over the country. The practice that firstappeared id Maharashtra in fifth and sixth century AD, land grants covered a largepart of Madhya Pradesh and became prominent in the Bengal region in the sixthand seventh century in Assam, in the eighth century in Tamil Nadu and in the ninth

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

10/21

and tenth in Kerala. This adversely affected certain segments of the society andgave rise to migrations of peasants. But migrations could not liberate the peasantsfrom the oppression of the princes and beneficiaries because of similar political andeconomic organizations everywhere.

Check Your ProgressNote: i) Space is given below for each question for your answer.

ii Compare your answer s) with the text.1 What was the difference in land tenure approaches in pre-Gupta period?Illustrate your answer with approaches followed by Satavahanas, Sakas

and Kushans.

.............................................................................................................

............................................................................................................

2 Describe different land tenure systems followed in Gupta period.............................................................................................................

2 2 2 Land Tenure Systems in Medieval IndiaAfter the collapse of the Mauryan Empire, no such strong empire existed, whichcould have sustained a strong official set up to look after the matters concerningrevenue administration, resulting in the emergence of intermediaries in the revenuesystem, which was a strong element of the feudal system.The land tenure system in the medieval India can be mainly studied under threeheads:

1) Land Tenure System in the period 8 I2 AD: The significantcontribution in the history of land tenure system in medieval begins fromRashtrakutas. They originally belonged to LattaEura the modem Eatur ofMaharashtra. In the Deccan charters of 7thand 8 centuries AD, Rashtrakutaswere exhorted not to disturb the peaceful enjoyment of land grants. In mostpart of the north India, the rural economy was termed as feudal because amajor section of the surplus production from the land was appropriated by aparticular section of people who claimed it as a hereditary right even thoughthey did not participate in the production process in any way.However, in southern p rt of India, the Chola administration had an elaboratesystem of land tenure system. A well-organized department of land revenueexisted, which was known as puravu-vari t inaik-kalam. All the land wascarefully surveyed and classified into tax paying and non-taxable land. Thetaxable land was further classified into different grades according to its naturalfertility and the crops raised on it. In Chalukya administration, the major

Origin and evelopment ofLand Tenure Systems inIndia

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

11/21

andTenure Systems ndgrarian Structure source of revenue was land and the different land taxes to be paid weresiddhaya, dasavanda, niruni-sunka and melivana. Siddhaya was a fixedtax levied not only on land but also on houses and shops. Dasavanda referredto one-tenth portion of tax payable to authority out of the yield from the land.Niruni-sanka was the water cess to be paid by the fanner and Melivanawas tax levied on ploughs. During the rule of Kakatiyas of Warangal land wasdivided into the three categories of dry, wet and garden areas for the purposeof assessment. The tax was generally collected both in kind and cash but taxon dry and garden land was always paid on cash. The tax collected from wetland was called para i.e, one-eighth of the rent, and that from dry land knownas pangamu which was one-fourth of the rent. Sunkamu was a kind of taxlevied on garden land.

2) Land Tenure System in Delhi Sultanate Notable contribution in this periodtowards land management and development starts with the Ala-ud-din Khalji'sregime (1296- 1316) wherein some financial reforms were introduced to increaseland revenue upto 50 of gross production. He initiated several types of landgrants such as inum and w a y . Similarly Muhammad Tughluq (1325-135 1)introduced some agricultural reforms to improve farming. He established anagriculture ministry called as diwan-i-kohi to bring barren land under cultivation.The principal achievement of the Delhi Sultanate was systematization of agrarianexploitation and enhancement in land revenue. The Delhi Sultanate classifiedthe land into three categories- iqta land i.e. land assigned to officials as iqtas,khalisa land i.e. crown land which is the land under the control of the Sultanand whose revenues were meant for maintenance of royal household, andfinally inam land madad-i-maash)or waqf land which were land assigned orgranted to religious leaders.

3) Land Tenure System during Mughal Period During the Mughal rulerevenue farming was prevalent where the highest bidder was posted as therevenue collector giving him undue power over the tiller of the land. TheMughals who conquered India in the 16th century left the land to the cultivatorsat first in exchange for the usual taxes. Often, former small rulers wereemployed as tax collectors and were given 10 of the collected amount asremuneration for this work. They were even allowed to keep the land they hadheld before and were exempted from paying taxes. They were strictly control'to prevent from collecting more taxes than their lawful share.Emperor Akbar (1556-1605) implemented radical reforms. During his rule,there were four main systems of revenue assessment:a) Zabti or Dahsala System: Land was classified in Akbar's reign in fourcategories for the purpose of assessment, namely, polaj (land which was

cultivated every year and never left fallow), parati or yarauti (landwhich had to be left fallow for a time to enable it to recover fertility),chachar (land which had to be left fallow for two or three years) andfinally, banjar (land which remained uncultivated for five or more years).Polaj and parauti were further classified into three categories, good,middle and bad and the average produce per bigha of these threecategories was taken as normal produce of a bigha. Parauti land whencultivated had the same revenue as polaj land. Chachar and banjarland were charged at a concessional rate.

b) Batai, Ghallabakshi or Bhaoli: In this method of crop sharing, producewas arranged into heaps and divided into three shares, one of which wastaken by the states.

c) Kankut: It was a rough estimate of produce on the basis of pastexperience.

l Nasaq: In this system, a rough calculation was made on the basis of pastrevenue receipts of the peasants.

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

12/21

During the Mughal period, large portion of the empire land was assigned to certain higin a d DevdoplRoet oclass of people as a part of land grants, which was known as jagirs. Though this and Tenure y s k m iwas a temporary assignment, some permanent land grants were also given such as ndipmadad-i-ma ash i.e. grant for subsistence.Jahangir introduced a system of altamgha grant, which could be annulled only bythe order of the emperor. There was another kind of land grant known as aimmawhich was to be made to the Muslim religious leaders. Being more or lesspermanently installed, the grantees often sought to acquire zarnindari rights withintheir grants and else where.After Aurangzeb's death in 1707, the power of the central government decreasedrapidly, and the control over the tax revenues was lost. In order to obtain revenues,tax collectors' posts were leased to the highest bidders in exchange for fixed sums.On the basis of their knowledge of the local conditions, the tax collectors were freeto extort as much as possible from the rural population and keep for themselves thedifference between the collected taxes and the amount to be remitted. Theseassignees were the first intermediary step in the direct tax relations between the

government and cultivators.The transfer of tax collection rights, known already in pre-Mughal period, forspecific regions as remuneration for services rendered, became so common that,under Aurangzeb's reign, 90 of all tax revenues fell to such privileged parties,and only 10 to the ruler. These grants of land with the right to collect taxes fromit were also conferred on favourites. The conferment of such jagir transferred allthe rights the government held, i.e., taxes, claims to uncultivated land, police power,etc., but no claims to the cultivators' land. Whenever tax collectors became landlordsin the course of time, this was dud to their reclaiming wasteland or their confiscatingthe land of people who owed taxes.Towards the end of the Mughal era, a type of right to land developed which wasin the hands of some parasitical rent collectors who did not perform any work. Butthis refers to the government's tax rights, not to direct claim to landed property,or land utilization, on peasants' land. Their old saying 'Taxes are the king's wealth,the land belongs to me' was still valid.

Check Your ProgressNote: i) Space is given below each question for your answer.

ii) Compare v70ur nswer(s) with the text.1) What was the significant contribution of Delhi sultanates towards landtenure and revenue administration?

............................................................................................................

............................................................................................................

............................................................................................................

............................................................................................................2 What were the four classifications of land during Akbar's reign in Mughalperiod?

.................. ........................................................................................................................................

............................................................................................ ......................

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

13/21

Land Tenwe Systems andAgrarian Structure 2 2 3 Impact of olonialism on Land Tenure SystemIndia's invasion by the British and their rule (1757 D to 1947 AD) brought abouta complete transformation in the country's land tenure system in the course of time.The East India Company experienced difficulty in its trading because the scale ofBritish goods in India was insignificant. On the other hand, the exportation of goldand silver from England to pay for Indian goods was soon prohibited. The Companyfound a solution by securing money from In da to pay for Indian goods. It collectedtaxes from the Indian rulers which, in the beginning. brought revenues of only10 of the levied taxes, but, since the control over the amount of levied taxesbecame lax at the end of the Mughal period, its revenues increased.Lord Cornwallis is known as the brain behind revenue and land tenure systemduring the British period. He introduced 'Permanent Settlement' in 1793 in Bengaland Bihar. The main objectives behind establishment of Permanent Settlementwere:a) Conversion of ~arnindars nd revenue collectors into landlords.b) Reducing the status of cultivators to mere tenants and deprivation of their

rights.c Creation of political allies for the British.d) Sufficient financial security for the British administration.e) Minimum expen&ture for revenue administration.f Suppression of the peasantry by the zamindars.The British assumed that ll the land belonged to the state and was thus at theirdispo~al.They registered the local tax collectors, who were called zamindars, asowners of the land in their district. These zamindars had to collect and deliver thetaxes; the amount was fixed at the beginning and remained the same permanently.To give the zamindars an incentive, they were given freedom to decide how muchto demand from the cultivators. On the other hand, the fixed lump sum of tax wasan incentive to put more land under cultivation and, thus, have more taxpayers inthe region under their control.The right to the land conferred on the zamindars was alienable, rentable andheritable. This arrangement was a complete novelty in India. The privilege ofutilizing land had become a saleable good. Those who had been cultivators until thenwere reduced to the status of 'occupancy tenants.' These occupancy rights wereheritable and transferrable and were not tampered with as long as the holders paidtheir taxes. In contrast to this, the tenants who cultivated land owned by the taxcollectors were tenants-at-will, i.e., they could be evicted.In the beginning, the arrangement hardly faced any problems. The small number ofcultivators prevented the zamindars from demanding too high taxes. They wereinterested in attracting people to cultivate the land and, thus, increase the numberof tax-payers so that the difference between the revenues and the fixed amountthat had to be remitted was larger.The detrimental consequences of recognizing the tax collectors as landlords and ofintroducing the legal institution of saleable private landed property soon becameevident and considerable changes occurred in the demographic and economic situation.The industrial revolution in England brought about a change in the British policytowards India. The objective was no longer to import from India, but to sell Englishproducts in India. Since the textile industry played an important role at the beginningof industrialization in England, large amounts of cheap products manufactured bymechanical looms w q e exported to India and this soon led to collapse in th

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

14/21

indigenous textile home industry, leading to a situation where a large number of Origin and evelopment ofweavers became unemployed. In order to secure a subsistence, they migrated to Land Tenure Systems inIndiathe rural areas and tried to secure land on lease so that they could farm. The scopeof this migration e.g. Dacca's inhabitants alone decreased from 150,000 to 20,000between 1824 and 1837 caused pressure on the rural areas and brought abouta complete change in the relationships between zamindars and tenants. The monopolyof controlling the means to secure livelihood shifted power unilaterally into thehands of the zamindars who were able to extoit more and more taxes as thedemand for land increased. This led to indebtedness and often to the loss ofoccupancy rights and relegation to tenants-at-will.The great discrepancy between the fixed amount of taxes to be remitted and theincreasing revenues made the zamindars wealthy. Soon they no longer took thetrouble of collecting taxes themselves but sub-leased this office to others while theythemselves lived on the remainder of the amount claimed as taxes after paying tothe sub-assignees7' their due. The difference between the revenues and the amountsto be remitted was so big that even the sub-assignees tried to sub-lease. Aftersome time, it became quite common to have 10 to 20 intermediaries, more or lesswithout any specific function, between the government 'and the farmers, and theyall had a share in the cultivation yield.In addition, abwabs as supplements and fees for the most curious reasons wereintroduced; for example, for using an umbrella, for permission to sit down in thezarnindar's office, for being allowed to stand up again, etc. Moreover, the begar ,unpaid work which the tenants were forced to perform on the zamindar's land, tooklarger proportions. On the average, it amounted to 20-25 of the. lease. Thesedevelopments may be regarded as consequences of the changes in the land tenurebrought about by the Permanent Settlement, as more and more cultivators becameindebted, lost their occupancy rights, and experiences a decline in their status totenants-at-will or agricultural labourers. On the other hand, the wealth of thezamindars kept increasing on account of the income they earned from appropriatingthe difference between the amount of taxes and the rentals, the increase in cultivatedareas, money-lending, and expropriation of debtors. In course of time, the z mind riregion was characterized by the marked difference between.wealth, power, andprospects in life.Changes in the monetary value, prices, nd the amount of cultivated areas turnedthe fixed tax into nothing but a token sum after 150 years, and considerable taxlosses ensued. The z mind ri system was not extended to the whole of India.Because of the experience, with the system, better knowledge of the local conditions,and liberal influences on the colonial policy, the provinces which came under Britishcontrol later were assigned other taxation systems.Another land tenure system prevalent during British period was Ryotwari settlement,prevalent in Madras and Bombay presidencies where zamindars with large estatesdid not exist. Hence a need was felt to make a settlement directly with actualcultivators. There was a growing income from land because of periodic revision ofrevenue under this system. Another significant objective behind establishment ofthis system was to protect cultivators from oppression of zamindars which wasrampant in the permanent settlement areas. However, there were some drawbacksthe Ryotwari system as exorbitant land revenue fixation, government's right toenhance land revenue at its own will, payment of revenue even when the producewas partially or totally destroyed and finally, replacement of large number of zamindarsby one giant zamindar i.e. the state.A third land settlement system which was practiced in some of the areas under theBritish such as Gangetic valley, north-west provinces, parts of central India andPunjab, was modified version of z mind ri settlement wherein revenue settlement

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

15/21

andTenure Systemsgrarian Structurr was made village by village or estate by estate with village chiefs or head of thefamilies. In North India and in the Punjab where villages with joint land rights were

cornon, an attempt was made to utilize this structure in the Mahalwari system.Taxadion was imposed on the village community as theoretical landlord, since it hadthe land rights. The village community had to distribute these taxes among thecultivators who owed taxes individually and jointly. Everyone was thus liable for theothers arrears. A village inhabitant, the lambardars collected the amounts andremitted the collected amount. Here, too, tax assessment was revised at intervals.Despite t is different system, the conditions of cultivators constantly deteriorated inthese regions as well. The high taxes fixed by the government half to two-thirdsof the net yield was the usual amount made investments impossible. Because offragmentation resulting from inheritance, the farms became smaller and smaller.The fact that land could be used as collateral made it possible to borrow money topay taxes in the ease of crop failures. As a result, more and more farms passedinto the hands of moneylenders who were, often more others than the better-offcultivators in the village. In the course of time, they ceased to cultivate their landthemselves and resorted to sub-leasing it instead. Finally, the ryotwari region wasno longer a region of self-cultivator. More than one-third of the land was leasedand in many districts the leased land was more than two thirds. The great demandfor land owing to the population growth made it possible to let others work foroneself.In the Mahalwari region as well, sub-leasing and indebtedness became more andmore common. Indeed, it was not possible to transfer the land to people who werenot from the locality, but the landed property certainly became concentrated in thehands of a few wealthy people, whereas the others lost their rights. A constantlyincreasing number of people became landless. While in the middle of the 19thcentury there were still no landless, in 1931 and 1945, 33 and 70 million landlesslabourets respectively were registered. Others succeeded in renting some land, buton less favourable terms. Share-tenancy, in particular, increased greatly.This kind of land and revenue settlement undesirable effects on Indian agricultureand economy, such as rural indebtedness, rise of money-lenders, growth of agriculturallabourers, destruction of handicraft industries and finally stagnation and deteriorationof agricplture.The British land policy, which lasted for 150 years, as well as the consequences ofeconomic changes and the drastic population growth, led to a complete change inthe land tenure system in India. Whereas formerly, the cultivators possessed theright of use the land and the government had the right to impose taxes, now therights in land were split into many parts. In this process, not only did a large numberof cultivators lost their valid land rights and felt a ball in their status to unprotectedtenants and labourers. At the same time, the tax collectors became landlords andlarge landowners. stratum of intermediaries who did not have any specificproductive function developed, and the land passed into the hands of moneylenders.This caused an enormous deterioration in financial conditions, whereby, the mass offarmers lived in abject poverty.To explain the further development following India s independence, it is importantto note that, admittedly, the economic situation of the different groups of the ruralpopulatiob had experiences changes and also development but a large part of thepopulation remained poor. Also in its terms of dominant characteristics the socialsystem remained inchanged. There existed complicated relationship pattern betweenlandlords, cultivators, and its landless without the earlier social order that acceptedmutual rights and obligations and which provided everyone even the poor a placewithin the rural society.

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

16/21

The system aimed at satisfying the needs of everyone in the economic and social Origin and Development ofsector and was based on the fact that all members were dependent upon one Land Tenure Systems inIndiaanother. Thus which the landlords owned land they were dependent upon h elandless tenants agricultural labourers and village craftsmen to cultivate it. Inverselythe landless could not utilize their labour in an agrarian society if the landlords didnot give them an opportunity of working on the field. This made it necessary forthe landlords to maintain the landless economic situation at least at a level whichwas not detrimental to their capacity to work d iscouraged them to m igrate. This notonly forced the existence of a minimum wage although very low but also inducedfinancial aid in emergencies crop failures etc. In addition the landlords preferredto meet the obligations resulting from their labour relationships.Such m utual relationships existed even in the social sector. The landlord assured theprotection to their workers whereas the landless labourers adopted a loyal attitudetowards their employers. This secured him power and influence and put him in aposition to represent their interests well. In the war time these behavioural patternsbecame so ingrained that the obligations of the strong towards the weak becamea social norm and paternalistic behaviour was a prerequisite for being recognizedas a leading personality. This norm which is typical for rural societies sets obviouslimits to exploitation. It is true that the level of these limits was very low but theyguaranteed a subsistence. It is also important to observe that the rights had beenunilaterally shifted to the benefit of the landlords but the landless labourers did notconsider themselves to be exploited. Here religion may have played an importantrole but the existence of mutual relationships ven if they were unequal grantedsecurity against threat to existence which was of important in many situations.

Table 2 1: The Land Tenure System in British PeriodProvince Dates of Formation of Land Tenure System

ConquestBengal Presidency 1757,1765 Revenue auctiorls in early 1770s; old

landlords dispossessed, several defaults,famine; old landlords reinstated in 1784;Lord Cornwallis announces PermanentSettlement in 1793:landlords rents fixed in perpetuity, stiffpenalties for default.

Madras Presidency 1765,1790-1801 1765-territories came under PermanentSettlement.Mumo and Read tried individual system insome districts from 1796-1805; in 1807 alldistricts put under landlords for 3 years,leases renewed for 10 years in 1810-11;Munro went to England and convinced theDirectors of the East India Company to orderan individual settlement in the whole ofMadras; order implemented after 1820 whenleases expired; all future defaulting landlordestates also converted to individual system.

Bombay Presidency 1803,1817-18 Individual system tried in Poona in 1820 s,but failed; Wingate and Goldsmid startBombay Survey Systemin 1835 for individualsettlement system; a few long-standinglandlords left in place in certain areas.

North-West 1775, 1801-03 Permanent Settlement in 1775.Provinces 3 and 4-year landlord leases in 1802-1819.

Question of Permanent Settlement widely............................

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

17/21

Land Tenure Systems andAgrarian Structure debated: revenue secretary Holt Mackenzie's1819 Minute recognized the existence of

village bodies and asked for their rights tobe protected in any settlement; regulationpassed in 1822.

Oudh 1856 Lord Dalhousie announced settlement withvillage bodies wherever possible; Mutiny in1857 before this could be done; LordCanning reverses policy in 1858 andbrings back landlords (talukdars) with fullproprietary rights.

Central Provinces 1818 Former ruler left in charge of certain areas(but taken over in 1856), no fixed policy inremaining area for some time. Landlord( malguzari ) settlement announced in 1853,implemented in 1850s. Sambhalpur districthowever put under individual cultivatorsystem.

Berar 1856 Was under Nizam till 1856; first landlordsystem was tried but it failed; then BombaySurvey System (individual cultivator) wasapplied.

Assam 1765,1824-26 Some areas transferred from Bengal hadPermanent Settlement; others got individual-cultivator systems.

Panj ab 1846,1849 Village-based system put into placeeverywhere; practically no big landlords.

Source: Banerjee, A. and Iyer, Lakshrni (2001), The Imperial Legacy: Colonial Land TenureSystem in Independent India. www.bu.edu/ecan/ied/neudc/papers/iyer-final2.pd~

2.3 L ND R FORMS IN INDEPENDENT INDI2.3.1 Problems in Land Revenue System in Pre Independent IndiaIn this section we will discuss the problems ailing the land revenue system prevalentin India du; to exploitative policy of British in pre independent India:a) Intermediaries for Collection of TaxThe imposition of Colonial Rule in India led to a drastic break with the past, in thesense that not only did the scale and intensity of the exploitation of the villagecommunities increase greatly, it.also led to the introduction of new, and almostentirely parasitic intermediaries between the state and the tax paying masses.These intermediaries who were typically induced (or pressurized) to abandontraditional restraint, and discard the old formulae that helped mediate the burden onthe typical village peasant or artisan.In addition, the British obliged these intermediaries to collect the taxes not in kindbut in cash. Since the peasant had little experience, or understanding, of a casheconomy, this put a further burden on the peasant, who now also had to face theunscrupulous grain traders and usurious money-lenders, who took full advantage ofthe highly diminished status of the Indian peasant in the colonial dispensation.The Indian peasant was reduced to a state of utter degradation. Social relationswithin the village also became highly distorted. The traditional solidarity that hadexisted between villagers was now subject to the divisive and ruinous tactics of theparasitic intermediaries who had the protection and support of the colonial state.

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

18/21

b) Intensification of Traditional Feudal Form of ExploitationAs colonial rule progressed, the typical Indian peasant (and village artisan) faceda dual burden. Not only did the traditional feudal form of exploitation greatly intensify,the typical Indian villager was now also subject to the forces of mercantile capitalism,which had its eyes on any savings or assets that any villager might possess.Eventually, the typical Indian villager was stripped of all savings, and driven tomortgaging a considerable portion of any assets whether personal jewelry, landand livestock, or tools and equipment.

Origin and Development ofLand Tenure Systems inIndia

c) Emergence of Socially Conservative Intermediary ClassThese petty mercantile intermediaries were the biggest obstacle to any radicalor revolutionary developments in the Indian countryside.

d) Destruction of Rural Small Scale IndustriesPrior to colonization, India was steadily becoming more urbanized, with a significantportion of the Indian population living in large or small towns. In addition, even inthe villages, a considerable proportion of the population comprised skilled artisanslike weavers, potters, carpenters, metal-workers, painters etc. The.proportion of thepopulation that was exclusively engaged in agricultural production was steadilydecreasing. But in the colonial regime, several laws were passed that led to acatastrophic de-urbanization and de-industrialization of India. Trade tariffs and exciseduties were set so as to destroy Indian industries, and squeeze domestic trade. 1states like Bihar and Bengal, severe restrictions were placed on the use of inlandwater-ways causing fishing and inland shipping and transportation to suffer. Thisled to even greater pressures on agriculture since large categories of highly skilledartisans and non-agricultural workers were thrown out of work.When the British left, India had become a village-based agricultural economy.India had inherited one of the most depressing scenarios in Asia a fairly denselypopulated nation with a pitiful urban base, a rural infrastructure in wrecks, a hugemass of population forced to survive exclusively on. agricultural production andexploitation by feudal intermediaries. However, the increasing sub-division of landwas a constant source of problems and tensions in the countryside.2 3 2 Initiatives for Mitigating the Problem of Exploitative SystemAs is evident from the previous section, there was a wide scale exploitation ofagriculture labourers and peasants due to revenue intermediaries and accumulationof land with very few individuals. So the government in independent India had toinitiate appropriate steps towards reducing these problems. These measures towardsland reform could be studied under three categories.a) Ceiling on Land Holdings The land distribution in India has been widelyiniquitous with 314 of fertile land under the ownership of 7 of rur l population

while remaining 114 of the land highly subdivided and fragmented underownership of 48% of rural population.. The remaining 45% of rural populationwere landless or tenant labour, of which approximately 25% were working asdaily wagers on the land owned by others. It was therefore natural to expectthat independent India would endeavour to correct inequity in the land ownershipby ceiling the land holdings.

b) Rationalization of Land Tenure System The antiquated land tenure systemenforced by British provided little or no encouragement to the stabilization orimprovement of agriculture. Hence it was only natural that the political leadershipthought of improvement in land tenure system through constitutional provisions.Youewould read about these constitutional provisions in the units of next block.

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

19/21

Land Tenure ystems and c) Reform of Tenancy System: These were required from the view points ofgrarian Structure economic optimization of agriculture and equitable distribution of land ownership.As Aurthur Young writes, Give a man a secure possession of bleak rock andhe will turn it into a garden; Give him a nine year lease of a garden and hewill convert it into a desert7'.

These three-pronged strategies have been the building blocks of land reform inindependent India. Land reform has been recognized and accepted as n importantinstrument of economic and social change.The First Five-Year Plan has clearly mentioned the land policy and the specific landreform measures to be undertaken. Most of the states passed the legislations forabolition of zamindari and similar exploitative land tenure systems. Now landtenure systems like Zamindari, Mahalwari, J a g i ~nam, etc. are abolished in allthe states. As a result of abolition of Zamindari and intermediaries, about 26 lakhintennediaries and 20 lakh tenants got proprietary rights of lands i.e. they becamethe land owners. This has resulted in improving their economic and social conditions.The land revenue income of the states has also increased. Tenancy reforms weremade for the removal of intermediaries between the state and the landholder. Thesereforms aimed to get Land to the tiller .After Independence considerable importance was given to collection and maintenanceof land records so that they could form the basis of land development of thecountry. These situations helped in development of the present day land recordssystem. A number of land records are prescribed to be maintained at the village,tehsil and district levels and statements of land holdings, land revenue and rentalcropped areas, land use pattern are maintained. There are more than 20 registersthat are being maintained by revenue department.The principal records beingmaintained are:

1) Village Map: A pictorial form showing the village and field boundaries;2) Field Books or Khasra : It is an index to the map, in which changes in thefield boundaries, their area, particulars of tenure-holders, methods of irrigation,cropped area, other uses of land etc. are shown; and

3) Records of Right or Khatouni The names and classes of tenure of alloccupants of land are recorded in it.Check Your Progress 3Note: i) Space is given below each question for your answer.

ii Compare your answer(s) with the text.1) What were the three kinds of land settlement during British rule in India?

............................................................................................................

............................................................................................................

2 What were the initiatives taken by independent India towards land reform?............................................................................................................

............................................................................................................

............................................................................................................

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

20/21

Origin and Development of2 4 LET US SU UP Land Tenure Systems inIndiaLand tenure system in ancient India is marked by gradual changes and it hasevolved from comm on o wnership to individual ownership. Since human beings usedto move as tribal groups from one place to another, land was considered to be giftof nature and no person in particular owned it, it was commonly used by all themembers of the tribal group. At later stages, when man started practicing settledagriculture, the conc ept of individual own rship develop ed. Agriculture in this periodwas in the transitory stage of nomadic cultivation and settled agriculture. It is clearfrom the Vedic literature that Vedas prohibited land grants. Since in this period, allproperty was under common ownership, the idea of gifting land to anyone wasunlikely.In the post Vedic period land was no longer the comm on property of the tribe andprivate ownership of land was gradually being established. Though land grant hadstarted, the practice was not readily accepted by all and was looked upon with anattitude of indecisiveness.But with the settling of Aryans society in the Gangetic plains, with the populationgradually increasing the shortage of cultivable land began to be felt and frequenttransfer of land became more common. Mauryan agriculture had two types oflandholdings: the Rashtra landholding was to a large extent independent of the statemachinery in their internal functioning and administration and the Sita type, whichwas formed by clearing forestlands with the help of the tribesmen.There were different land tenure systems in the Gupta period, which is evident fromland grant inscriptions. The se are (a) Nivi d h a m s .e. land endowment in perpetuity,(b) Nivi dharma aksayana i.e. perpetual endowment which a recipient could notalienate but could make use of the income accruing from it eternally, (c) Apradadharma which means that a recipient has all rights to enjoy such a property butno right to make a further gift of the same and can only enjoy the interest andincome from the endowed.land, but had no administrative rights and finally(d) Bhumichchhidranyaya i.e. rights of ownership as are acquired by a manmaking barren land cultivable for the first time and is free from liability to pay rentfor it.In medieval period principal achievement of the Dclhi Sultans was systematizationof ag rarian exploitation and e nhanc emen t in land revenue. The Delhi Su ltans classifiedthe land into three categories: (a) iqta land i.e. land assigned to offjcia ls as iqtas,b) khalisa land i.e. crown land which is the land under the control of Sultan andwhose revenues were meant for maintenance of royal household, and finally(c) inam land madad-i-maash) or w a d land i.e. land assigned or granted toreligious leaders. During M ughal rule land w as classified in Ak bar s reign in fourcategories, for the purpose of assessment namely: (a) polaj (land which wascultivated every year and never left fallow), (b) parati or parauti (land which hadto be left fallow for a time to enable it to recover fertility), (c) chuchar (land whichhad to be left fallow for two or three years) and finally, (d) banjar (land whichremained uncultivated for five or more years).The British used three kind of system for the purpose of revenue settlement betterknown as zamindari system, ryotwari system and mahalwari system. Afterindependence, the Indian G overnment initiated measures in three directions nam elyceiling Lof land holding s, rationalization of land ten ure system , reform of tenancysystem so as to have land reform with social objective.

8/13/2019 Block 1 MRDE 003 Unit 2

21/21

andTenure Systems andAgrarian ~tructure 2 5 KEY WORDS

Land Tenure System The traditional or legal rights individual personsor groups of persons have on land and the socialrelationships among the rural population thatemerges from such land rights.

Mahalwari System Revenue settlement made village by village orestate by estate with village chiefs or head ofthe families.Tenancy Reforms Removal of the intermediaries between the stateand the landholder.2 6 SUGGESTED RE DINGSSingh, R. P. 1987), Sociology of Rural Development in India Discovery PublishingHouse, Delhi.Ray, S.K. 1986), Indian Economy Prentice Hall India, New Delhi.Reddy, K. Knshna 1999), Indian History Tata McGrawHill, New Delhi.Agnihotri, V.K. 1999), Indian History Allied Publishers, New Delhi.Banerjee, A. and Iyer, Lakshmi 2001), The Imperial Legacy: Colonial Land

-Tenure System in Independent India. www.bu.edu~ecan/ied~neudc/papers/i yer final2.pdQ

http:/members tripod co~DIA~RESOURCE/indianagricu1tureehtmlouth AsianVoice October, 2003