Mahalwari, Ryotwari and Zamindari systems

Mahalwari System:
In 1833, the Mahalwari Settlement was introduced in the Punjab, the central provinces and parts of north
western provinces (Present UP). Under this system the basic unit of revenue settlement was the village or
the mahal. As the village land belonged jointly to the village community the responsibility of paying the
revenue rested with the entire mahal or the village community. So the entire land of the village was
measured at the time of fixing the revenue. A modified Mahalwari system called Gram
Vyavastha or Village Settlement was introduced in the Punjab. Though the Mahalwari system eliminated
the middlemen between the govt. and the village community & brought about improvement in irrigation
facility yet its benefit was largely appropriated by the govt.
Whereas the Zamindari the Ryotwari settlements were inferior adoptions respectively of English & French
systems the Mahalwari settlement was an improvisation of the traditional India system of an economic
community


Ryotwari System:
Where the land revenue was imposed directly on the ryots -- the individual cultivators who actually
worked the landthe system of assessment was known as ryotwari. Under the Ryotwari Systemevery
registered holder of land is recognised as its proprietor, and pays directly to Government. He is at liberty
to sublet his property, or to transfer it by gift, sale, or mortgage. He cannot be ejected by Government so
long as he pays the fixed assessment, and has the option annually of increasing or diminishing his
holding, or of entirely abandoning it. In unfavourable seasons remissions of assessment are granted for
entire or partial loss of produce. The assessment is fixed in money, and does not vary from year to year,
in those cases where water is drawn from a Government source of irrigation to convert dry land into wet,
or into two-crop land, when an extra rent is paid to Government for the water so appropriated; nor is any
addition made to the assessment for improvements effected at the Ryot's own expense. The Ryot under
this system is virtually a Proprietor on a simple and perfect title, and has all the benefits of a perpetual
lease without its responsibilities, inasmuch as he can at any time throw up his lands, but cannot be
ejected so long as he pays his dues; he receives assistance in difficult seasons, and is irresponsible for
the payment of his neighbours. . . . The Annual Settlements under Ryotwari are often misunderstood, and
it is necessary to explain that they are rendered necessary by the right accorded to the Ryot of
diminishing or extending his cultivation from year to year. Their object is to determine how much of the
assessment due on his holding the Ryot shall pay, and not to reassess the land. In these cases where no
change occurs in the Ryots holding a fresh Potta or lease is not issued, and such parties are in no way
affected by the Annual Settlement, which they are not required to attend


Zamindari System:

Zamindari system was a way of collecting taxes from peasants. The zamindar was
considered a lord, and would collect all taxes on his lands and then hand over the collected
taxes to the British authorities (keeping a portion for himself). The similarities to medieval
feudalism are evident.
Under the British, they resembled landed gentry (although they lived similarly privileged
lives under the Mughals) and sometimes styled themselves as little kings, or rajas. Some
new Zamindars were old Rajas.

Ryotwari and Mahalwari System in British India
Ryotwari and Mahalwari System
The Ryotwari and Mahalwari Systems were the tow major means of collecting reveneus from agricultural
lands. They were introduced in some parts of British India.
Ryotwari System
The revenue settlement in which the peasants were recognized as the owners of land was called the Ryotwari
system.
The Zamindars pressed by high revenue demands survived by imposing high rent on the peasants. While
revenue was the share of the state, the rent was payable by tenant cultivators to the legal owners of land. In
other parts of India with the exception of Benaras and northern part of Madras where settlements with the
Zamindars were made, legal ownership was given to peasant cultivators.
Under the Ryotwari system the peasant, as owners of land paid revenue directly to the state officials. There
was no one who stood between them to claim rent. Yet revenue demand in the Ryotwari areas tended to be
very high. Unlike Bengal it was never permanently fixed to leave the room open for periodic increases in the
revenue burden. The Ryotwari system was first introduced in Madras. In the late eighteenth century and was
later extended to the Bombay presidency following the annexation of Maharashtra within the companys
empire.
Mahalwari System
There was yet another kind of Ryotwari, known as the Mahalwari system.
The Mahalwari system became the dominant practice in much of north India beyond Benaras and Awadh. By
this arrangement the ownership rights of the peasants were recognized; the responsibility of revenue collection
was entrusted with the village headmen and the village leaders who also had performed similar functions
before the advent of the British Rule.

Land Tenure System: British Legacy
In the initial years, East India company faced following problems:
1. Demand for British goods in India=negligible. (Because East India company was yet to destroy our handicraft
and artisans)
2. Under the Mercantilism policy of British: one countrys gain required another country/colonys loss.
Therefore, British Government prohibited East India company from exporting gold and silver from England to
pay for Indian goods import.
3. Company needed truckload of ca$H to maintain an army for defeating and subjugating native rulers.
East India company came up with following solution:
1. start collecting revenue from Indians
2. Use that Revenue to buy Indian raw material- export to England
3. Import finished goods back to India=> make profit.
But this solution had a problem: the revenue system under Mughals and Native rulers=too complex for
the British to understand, and there were no coaching classes or Wikipedia to help white men understand
this complex system.
Lord Cornwallis comes with a novel idea: just outsource the tax collection work to desi-middlemen:
Zamindars, Jagirdar, Inamdars, Lambardar etc. Consequently, British introduced three land tenure
systems in India:

Tenure system Presidency Features:
Overall coverage
Permanent Settlement: Features
1. Cornwallis + John Shore. In Bengal + Bihar. 1793
2. All the land belonged to the state and was thus at their disposal.
3. British designated zamindars (local tax collectors) , as owners of the land in their district. This system was
adopted in several forms such as Zamindari, Jagirdari, Inamdari, etc.
Permanent
settlement
1. Bengal
2. Bihar
(BeBi)
Who? Cornwallis + John Shore. In Bengal + Bihar. 1793
Company outsourced the revenue collection work to Zamindars
Very exploitative. Led to many revolts. Hence British didnt implement it in other parts of
India.
In Awadh/Oudh, Lord Delhousie wanted to implement Mahalwari but then 1857s munity
broke out. Later Lord Canning introduced Talukdari system-similar to Permanent
settlement.
Ryotwari
1. Madras,
2. Bombay
3. Assam
(MBA)
Who? Thomas Munro and Read in Madras. (1820)
Who? Wingate and Goldsmid in Bombay (1835). In 1820 it was tried in Poona but failed.
Later Wingate and Goldsmid start Bombay Survey System in 1835 for individual settlement
system.
Company directly collected revenue from farmers.
Madras was initially under Permanent settlement type system but Thomas Munro convinced
the directors of East India company to convert this area under Ryotwari / direct settlement
system.
Mahalwari
1. Gangetic
valley
2. north-west
provinces,
3. parts of central
India
4. Punjab
Company outsourced revenue collection work to Village community itself. Technically
village headman (Lambardar) was made responsible for tax collection
North West Provinces initially had Permanent settlement but transformed to Mahalwari
system by Holt Mackenzie.(1822)
Tenure system % of Agri.land in British Provinces
Zamindari 57
Ryotwari 38
Mahalwari 5
Total 100%
4. These zamindars had to collect revenue from farmers and deliver to the British.
5. Converted Zamindars into landlords. The right to the land conferred on the zamindars was
6. Revenue amount was fixed at the beginning and remained the same permanently.
7. Zamindar were given freedom to decide how much to demand from the cultivators. Stiff penalties on
defaulters.
8. there was a provision of keeping a portion of taxes for the zamindar himself.
9. Zamindars right over land was
1. Alienable: meaning British could take it away and give it to another Zamindar, if first Zamindar did not
meet the Revenue collection targets.
2. Rentable: meaning Zamindar himself could further outsource his work among more smaller zamindars
3. Heritable: meaning Zamindar dies, his son/brother etc would get it.
10. Farmers became tenants. Two types
1. Tenants-at-will: farmers who cultivated on Zamindars land. They had no rights. They could be evicted
as per whims and fancies of Zamindar.
2. Occupancy Tenants: farmers who owned land. Their occupancy rights were heritable and transferrable
and were not tampered with as long as they paid their taxes.
Permanent Settlement: Consequences
#for British
gave financial security for the British administration.
Cost of running administration decreased. Because British had to collect Revenue from only a few Zamindars
instead of lakhs of farmers.
British got new political allies (Zamindars). They would keep their own militia to suppress peasant revolts, and
act as informers and remained loyal to British rule.
#learning from mistake
Permanent settlement system led to many agrarian revolts.
Governments income declined over the years, Because Revenue was permanently fixed + number of
intermediaries kept increasing.
Hence, British learned from the mistake and did not extent this permanent settlement/Zamindari system to the
whole of India. Instead, they established Ryotwari and Mahalwari systems in the remaining parts.
#Farmers lose bargaining power
Textile industry was the driver of industrial revolution in Britain. = raw cotton imported + finished textile
exported to India.
To prevent any competition from Desi textile industries, the British imposed variety of taxes and tariffs on
them=>desi textile business collapsed. Lakhs of weavers became unemployed, migrated to villages in search
of work.
Since they did not own any land, they had to become tenants-at-will for Zamindars.
Now Zamindars had the monopoly of controlling livelihood of thousands of people. They extorted more and
more taxes.
Moreover, the begar, unpaid work which the tenants were forced to perform on the zamindars land, took
larger proportions. On the average, it amounted to 20-25 % of the lease.
Western Bengal: Farmers got divided into two categories i) Jotedars (Rich farmers) ii)Bargadar
(Sharecroppers)
Eastern Bengal: Jute cultivation. Independent farmers with small to middlesize land holdings
#More outsourcing
Permanent settlement system created landed aristocracy for the first time in India. Zamindars used to chow
down part of the land Revenue collected. Thus they became wealthy and lazy. They outsourced their work to
more intermediaries / sub-tenants.
It became quite common to have 10 to 20 intermediaries, more or less without any specific function, between
the government and the farmers, And they all had a share in the cultivation yield + other illegal taxes.
As a result, 70-80% of farmers produce went to just Revenue and commissions only=> poverty, debts.
None of these middlemen or Zamindars invest money in agricultural improvement or new technology. They
just kept increasing rents. Hence traditional agriculture did not shift to capitalist agriculture, unlike other
economies.
Ryotwari System
By Sir Thomas Munro at first in Madras State and then adopted in Bombay, and Assam. But Why?
1. In permanent settlement areas, land Revenue was fixed. But over the years, agriculture prices/exports should
increase but governments income did not increase. (Because middlemen-zamindars chowed it down)
2. Zamindars were oppressive- leading to frequent agrarian revolts in the permanent settlement areas.
3. In Bihar, Bengal, there existed Zamindar/feudal lords since the times of Mughal administration. But Madras,
Bombay, Assam did not have Zamindars / feudal lords with large estates. So, hard to outsource work, even if
British wanted.
4. No middlemen in tax collection=> farmer has to pay less taxes=>increased purchasing power=>will improve
demand for readymade British products in India.
Consequently, all subsequent land tax or revenue settlements made by the colonial rulers were
temporary settlements made directly with the peasant, or ryot (e.g., the ryotwari settlements).
This model was based on English yeomen farmers.
Ryotwari System: Features
1. government claimed the property rights to all the land, but allotted it to the cultivators on the condition that
they pay taxes. In other words, It established a direct relation between the landholder and the government.
2. Farmers could use, sell, mortgage, bequeath, and lease the land as long as they paid their taxes. In other words
Ryotwari system gave a proprietary rights upon the landholders.
3. IF they did not pay taxes, they were evicted
4. taxes were only fixed in a temporary settlement for a period of thirty years and then revised.
5. government had retained the right to enhance land revenue whenever it wanted
6. Provided measures for revenue relief during famines but they were seldom applied in real life situation.
Ryotwari System: Consequences
Farmers had to pay revenue even during drought and famines, else he would be evicted.
Replacement of large number of zamindars by one giant zamindar called East India Company.
Although ryotwari system aimed for direct Revenue settlement between farmer and the government but over
the years, landlordism and tenancy became widespread. Because textile weavers were unemployed= they
started working as tenant farmers for other rich farmers. In many districts, more than 2/3 of farmland was
leased.
Since Government insisted on cash revenue, farmers resorted to growing cash crops instead of food crops. And
cash crop needed more inputs=>more loans and indebtedness.
After end of American civil war, cotton export declined but government didnt reduce the revenue. As a result
most farmers defaulted on loans and land was transferred from farmers to moneylenders.
Mahalwari System
Location: Gangetic valley, north-west provinces, parts of central India and Punjab. But why?
In North India and Punjab, joint land rights on the village were common. So, British decided to utilize this
utilize this traditional structure in a new form known as Mahalwari system.
Mahalwari System: Features
1. unit of assessment was the village.
2. taxation was imposed on the village community since it had the rights over land.
3. The village community had to distribute these tax collection targets among the cultivators
4. Each individual farmer contributed his share in the revenue.
5. Everyone was thus liable for the others arrears.
6. Farmers had right to sell or mortgage their property.
7. The village community did not necessarily mean entire village population. It was a group of elders, notables of
high castes.
8. A village inhabitant, called the lambardar, collected the amounts and gave to the British
9. British periodically revised tax rates.
Mahalwari system: Consequences
Since Punjab, Northern India = fertile land. So British wanted to extract maximum Revenue out of this region.
Land Revenue was usually 50% to 75% of the produce.
As generations passed- fathers would divide land among sons=> fragmentation=>farms became smaller and
smaller and productivity declined.
But still British demanded Revenue in cash. So, farmers had to borrow money to pay taxes in the case of crop
failures.
As a result, more and more farms passed into the hands of moneylenders. When farmer failed to repay debt,
Moneylender would take away his farm but he has no interest in self-cultivation so hed leasing it to another
farmer.
Thus, sub-leasing, indebtedness and landlessness became more and more common in Mahalwari region
Why is it called Modified Zamindari system?
Because in Mahalwari areas, the Land revenue was fixed for the whole village and the village headman
(Larnbardar) collected it. Meaning theoretically Village itself was a landlord/zamindar.
Other names for this system: Joint rent, joint lease, brotherhood tract (mahal) holding and gram wari etc.
Result of British Land Tenure system: Perpetual indebtedness, exploitation. When we gained
independence, picture was following:
farmers Agro-land of India
7% villagers (richest, Zamindar and other
intermediaries)
Owned 75% of fertile land
48% of villagers (tenants, sub-tenants)
Owned 25% of fertile land. (=imagine the land fragmentation and size of
landholdings)
45% of villagers Owned no land. Worked as farm laborers, petty traders, craftsman etc.
Total 100% Total 100%
Consequences of British Tenure systems
Land becomes a property
Before British During British rule
private ownership of land did not exist
land belonged to the village community
Land was never treated as the property of the kings -
benevolent or despotic, Hindu, Muslims or Buddhist.
Land was not treated as individual cultivators
property either.
Introduced private ownership of land
This divided village into 1) landlords 2)tenants 3)labourers
This this material transformation the agrarian society in India witnessed
profound social, economic, political, cultural and psychological change.
with generations- land kept dividing among sons=>land fragmentation,
diseconomies of scale, lower production.
Panchayat lost Prestige
Before British During British rule
Land matters and civil disputes were adjudicated by
Panchayat within the village.
Farmer had to approach British courts for matters related to Revenue,
property attachment, debt-mortgage etc.
Panchayats lost their power and prestige
Food insecurity
Before British During British rule
farmers usually grew foodcrops- wheat,
maize, paddy, jowar, bajra and pulses
Since British demand revenue in CASH, farmers resorted to growing cash crops:
indigo, sugarcane, cotton=> Area under foodcrop cultivation declined
Then, Lacks of People would die of starvation during famines.
Even after independence, and before green revolution- India was not self-
sufficient in grain production.
at independence India was faced with an acute food shortage
near-famine conditions in many areas.
Between 1946 and 1953 about 14 million tonnes of foodgrains worth Rs 10,000 million had to be imported =
this was nearly half of the total capital investment in the First Five Year Plan (195156).

Canals
Before British During British rule
Kings constructed ponds, canals
and wells to improve agriculture
irrigation taxes were moderate.
British did construct new canals
Positive: more area brought under cultivation, particularly in Punjab.
but most canals caused salinity and swamps=>declined productivity over the years
Taxes on Irrigation were quite high. Therefore Canal irrigation was used to grow sugar,
cotton and other cash crops, instead of food crops=>food insecurity, starvation and death
during famines.
Cash economy & indebted farmers
Before British During British rule
Land Revenue was paid in kind.
Village was a self-sufficient economy with
cooperative units.
British obliged the farmers to pay revenue in cash and not in kind.
The land revenue was increased arbitrarily to finance British wars and
conquests. But The farmers had no right to appeal in the court of law.
e.g. blacksmith would make farm-tools, would
get yearly payment in grains/kind.
Moneylending, mortgaging were negligible.
Farmers had no understanding of cash economy + frequent droughts and
famines
Hence they had to borrow money from unscrupulous grain traders and money-
lenders=> compound interest rate, perpetual indebtedness.
Eventually, the typical Indian villager was stripped of all savings, caught in
debt trap, mortgaging almost everything-whether personal jewelry, land and
livestock, or tools and equipment.
Collective village life based on common
economic interests and resultant cooperative
relations
A new village came-where existence was based on competition and struggle
among independent individuals.
Farmers shifted from food crop to Cash crops. But cash crops need more inputs in terms of seeds, fertilizer,
and irrigation, hence farmer had to borrow more.
This brought moneylenders, Shroff, Mahajan, Baniya, into limelight- they were in control of village land
without any accountability.
Thus British land revenue system transfered ownership of land from farmer to moneylender.
towards about the end of the colonial period, The total burden on the peasant of interest payments on debt and
rent on land could be estimated at a staggering Rs 14,200 million
According to RBIss survey in 1954:
credit supplier gave ___% of farmers loan requirements
moneylenders 93%
government 3%
cooperative societies 3%
commercial banks 1%
Serfdom
Before: slavery/bonded labour/Begari almost non-existent. But During British raj
Zamindars gave loan to farmers/laborers and demanded free labour in return.
This practice prevented farmers/laborers to bargaining wages.
Begari, Bonded labour, or debt bondage became a common feature in large parts of the country.
Even in ryotwari areas, upper caste controlled the land. Lower caste was reduced to sharecroppers and landless
laborers.
Rural Industry destroyed
Lack of Capitalist Agriculture
In most economies, the evolution is traditional farming=>capitalist farming methods. But in India, it did not
happen, why?
1. Large landowners in zamindari and ryotwari areas leased out their lands in small pieces to tenants.
2. Small tenants continued to cultivate them with traditional techniques= low productivity.
Before British During and After British rule
India was steadily becoming more urbanized,
Significant portion of the Indian population living in
large or small towns.
de-urbanization and de-industrialization of India
This led to even greater pressures on agriculture since large categories of
highly skilled artisans and non-agricultural workers were thrown out of
work.
When the British left, India had become a village-based agricultural
economy.
With an enormous population pressure on agriculture and an adverse
landman ratio of about 0.92 acre per capita at independence.
Even in Villages, there was skilled artisans like
weavers, potters, carpenters, metal-workers, painters
etc.
Trade tariffs and excise duties were set so as to destroy Indian industries,
and squeeze domestic trade.
Bihar and Bengal: severe restrictions were placed on the use of inland
water-ways causing fishing and inland shipping and transportation to
suffer.
3. Rich farmers/ zamindars lacked the riskbearing mindset for capitalist mode of production (i.e. invest more
money in seeds, fertilizer, animal husbandry, contract farming, large-scale capitalist agriculture using hired
wage labour under their direct supervision. etc).
4. Even if they wanted to take risk, government did not give any agricultural support, credit, insurance etc. yet
demanded high taxes.
5. It is not surprising, therefore, that Indian agriculture, which was facing long-term stagnation, began to show
clear signs of decline during the last decades of colonialism.
farming technology in 1951 % of farmers
wooden ploughs 97%
iron plough 3%
Use of improved seeds, artificial fertilizers, etc rare
some more points
Drain of
Wealth
Independent Farmer / tenant was hardly left with any money to re-investment in agriculture. Most of his surplus
income/profit went into paying taxes. These taxes were used for exporting raw material from India to Britain. = Drain of
wealth.
Social
Banditry
when individuals or small group of farmers couldnot organize a collective action against Zamindars/government, they started
robbery and dacoity.
When India got independence, the situation was:
VILLAGERS ASSOCIATED WITH FARMING AGRO-LAND
7% villagers (richest, Zamindar and other intermediaries) Owned 75% of fertile land
48% of villagers (tenants, sub-tenants) Owned 25% of fertile land. (=imagine the land fragmentation)
45% of villagers Owned no land. Worked as farm laborers.
Total 100% Total 100%

This article provides information about the meaning and objectives of land reforms in
India:
Meaning:
In a narrow sense, land reforms mean the redistribution of property rights in land for the benefit of small
farmers and agricultural labourers. In the broader sense, land reforms include two types of institutional
changes. One relates to agrarian relations and the other to the size of the unit of cultivation.

Image Courtesy : gg2.net/newImage/original/1355822318_Farmers.jpg
A United Nations publication has defined land reforms as measures concerning the reform of the land
tenure only. All other measures are included in agricultural reorganisation. According to Lipton, land
reforms are only those reforms in land tenure which improve the distribution of income among the
persons affected by these measures.
Objectives:
Land reforms are agrarian reforms. These reforms are undertaken to attain some objectives in the field of
agriculture. The following are the major objectives of land reforms policy.
1. Increasing productivity:
Increase in production constitutes the most important objective of land reforms. In the Indian context
land has been used as a good in two ways, one as a major source of making a living and the other as a
source of making money. As a source of living, it is essential that almost everyone should possess land. By
a source of making money is meant a change in tenure in such a way that the resources are most
efficiently utilized in agriculture.
2. Ensuring Social Justice:
So far as the Directive Principles of State Policy of our Constitution is concerned, the property or
resources of the community should be equally distributed. Since land constitutes the main asset of the
society, it should be distributed equally. This would ensure social justice.
3. Attaining a planned growth:
A self-sustaining planned growth can be attained through a system of land reforms. Land reforms provide
ownership rights to the cultivators. They come in direct contact with the government. All plans and
programmes made by the government for the development of agriculture receive direct participation of
the owner-peasants. Hence it becomes easier for the planners to formulate and implement suitable
policies for agrarian reforms.
4. Providing incentives:
If a farmer happens to be a farmer-in-tenancy, he has no incentive to work hard in the field to increase
productivity. This requires providing full guarantee to the cultivator to get the full benefits from his labour
and investment. The provisions of security of tenancy, rent regulation and conferment of ownership
provide a congenial atmosphere in which the farmers feel sure of reaping the fruits of their labour.
5. Creating Employment Opportunities:
An important objective of land reforms is to create employment opportunities in the rural sector. Land
reforms ultimately lead to redistribution of land holdings. Small farm holdings are made because of such
distribution of the existing cultivable lands among large numbers of farmers. Experiments have
demonstrated that small holdings create more employment opportunities than large holdings as per
hectare basis.
Phillip Raup, while summing up the objectives of land reforms says, Land reforms should combine
redistribution rights in land and supporting measures that are necessary to achieve three objectives: social
justice, political health and agricultural output expansion. However, in practice, it is difficult, if not
impossible, to achieve all the three objectives simultaneously through a given land reform measure.

This brief essay provides information about the land reforms in India!
The Britishers in India were not at all keen in adopting progressive land reforms measures for the rural
farmers. This had given the Zamindars and the big landlords a golden opportunity to exploit the rural
poor to a great extent.
It was only after independence that serious efforts were made to introduce land reforms measures. They
are as follows:
1. Abolition of Intermediaries:
Intermediaries like Zamindars, Talukdars, Jagirs and Inams had dominated the agricultural sector in
India by the time the country attained independence. Quite naturally top priority was accorded to the
abolition of intermediary tenures. Congress had long ago been committed to the idea of the removal of
intermediaries between the peasant and State.
Soon after independence, measures for the abolition of the Zamindari system were adopted in different
states. The first Act to abolish intermediaries was passed in Madras in 1948. Since then, state after state
passed legislation abolishing Zamindari rights.
The Orissa Estates Abolition Act was passed in 1951. By 1955, the progress for the abolition of
intermediaries had been completed in almost all the states.
The abolition of intermediaries has both advantages and disadvantages.
Advantages:
(a) As a result of the abolition of intermediaries, about 2 crore tenants are estimated to have come into
direct contact with the State making them owners of land.
(b) The abolition of intermediaries has led to the end of a parasite class. More lands have been brought to
government possession for distribution to landless farmers.
(c) A considerable area of cultivable waste land and private forests belonging to the intermediaries has
been vested in the State.
Disadvantages:
(a) Abolition of intermediaries has resulted in a heavy burden on the state exchequer .The ex-
intermediaries have been given a compensation amounting to Rs. 670 crores in cash and in bonds.
(b) It has led to large-scale eviction. Large-scale eviction, in turn, has given rise to several problems
social, economic, administrative and legal.
(c) Instead of the abolition of the official land-lords, absentee land-lords as a class have emerged. Hence
the claim of the official documents pertaining to the abolition of intermediaries has no logical foundation.
The truth is that it has changed only its garb.
2. Tenancy Reforms:
Rural India witnesses three types of tenants. They are- (a) permanent or occupancy tenants, (b)
temporary or non-occupancy tenants, and (c) sub-tenants. The permanent tenants have the permanent
ownership right over the land. The rent for permanent tenants is fixed. The right to cultivate land goes
from generation to generation so long as they pay rent.
Hence land is inheritable. Because of such security of holding, the occupancy tenants make improvement
on their land. They are almost the owners of land, as they can mortgage or sell their land.
There is hardly any difference between the peasant-proprietors or the owners of land and occupancy
tenants. The only difference is that while the owners pay the rent to the government, the occupancy tenant
pays it to the land-lord.
Temporary or non-occupancy tenants have no right to cultivate the land permanently. They can be evicted
from land on minor pretexts. In their case, rent is too high. It may be increased
arbitrarily. They do not make any improvement on the land for the fear of eviction.
Sub-tenants are the tenants who cultivate the land of the big land owners. They cultivate land only on
lease basis. The leases are rather oral. These can be changed at will. They pay rent either in cash or in
share of the product. In any case the rent is exorbitant.
There is no security of tenure. Their position is not only weak and insecure but also pitiable. According to
the National Sample Survey (8th round) 20 per cent of land is under the tenancy-at-will and sub-tenancy.
It is not at all possible to put an end to the tenancy system. But it can be mended so as to be acceptable
from the social as well as economic point of view. The tenancy reforms in various states have three
important features, though the provisions are not similar in all cases.
These are- (i) security of tenure for the tenants, (ii) fixation of fair rent and (iii) grant of ownership rights
to certain types of tenants.
(i) Security of tenure:
Sir Arthur Young rightly observed: Give a man the secure possession of a bleak rock and he will turn it
into a garden; give him a nine years lease of a garden and he converts it into a desert. This remark very
pithily sums up the need for providing security of tenure. Security of tenure creates interest among the
cultivators for improving their land. Further, it helps in attaining two basic objectives of land reforms
namely increase in productivity and promotion of social justice.
To protect tenants from ejectment and to grant them permanent rights on lands, laws have been enacted
in most of the states. They have three essential features.
(a) Tenants cannot be evicted without any reason. They can be evicted only in accordance with the laws.
(b) Land can be resumed by the landlord only on the ground of personal cultivation. But the land-lord can
resume the land only up to a maximum limit.
(c) The landlord should leave some area to the tenant for his own cultivation. The tenant in no case should
be made landless.
However, tenancy legislations in India are not uniform throughout the country. Each state has its own
legislation. In Orissa, a limit has been imposed on the landlords for resuming land for personal
cultivation.
(ii) Regulation of Rent:
In Pre-Independent India rents were high for obvious reasons. A number of factors such as defective land
tenure systems, pressure of population on land, absence of non-farm employment opportunities and the
apathetic and lukewarm attitude of the government towards the tenants interest were responsible for the
continuous rise in rents. Fifty per cent of the total produce was paid as rent.
In some areas the rent was as high as 70 per cent. In addition to such high rent, the tenant had to provide
certain free services to landlords. This was called Bethi and Beggary in Orissa. So at the beginning of the
First Plan, the Central Government insisted on the regulation of high rent by State Governments. It was
laid down that the rent to be paid to the landlord should not be more than 20 to 25 per cent.
Accordingly, different State Governments passed tenancy legislations to regulate rent. The main objective
of such Acts was to make the rent fair and reasonable. However, the maximum rent differs from state to
state. For example, while in Orissa and Bihar the rent is fixed at l/4th of the gross produce, in Punjab it is
one third and in Rajasthan it is one-sixth of the gross produce. The rates also vary within the state because
of the difference in the fertility of land.
(iii) Right of ownership:
So far as right of ownership is concerned, tenants have been declared as the owners of the land they
cultivate. They have to pay compensation to the owners. The amount of compensation should not exceed
the level of fair rent.
In some states provisions have been made allowing the tenant to purchase the leased land on payment of
a price to the landlord. If any dispute arises between the tenant and the landlord over the payment of
price, this may be referred to a land tribunal. The tribunal will decide the price to be paid by the tenant to
the landlord.
As a result of these measures about 40 lakh tenants have already acquired ownership rights over 37 lakh
hectares of land. They have become better-off economically and socially.
In several states, in the matter of tenancy reform, legislation falls short of the accepted policy. What is
even worse, the implementation of the enacted laws has been half-hearted, halting and unsatisfactory in
part of the country. The legal protection granted to tenants has often been ineffective.
3. Ceiling on land holdings:
The third important step of land reforms relates to the imposition of ceiling on land holdings. Ceiling on
land holdings implies the fixing of the maximum amount of land that an individual or family can possess.
Land ceiling has two aspects: one, the fixation of ceiling limit and two, the acquisition Ma of surplus land
and its distribution among the small farmers and landless workers.
The imposition of ceiling on agricultural holding is preeminently a redistributive measure. Prof. Gadgo
rightly observes, Among all resources, the supply of land is the most limited and the claimants for its
possession are extremely numerous. It is, therefore, obviously unjust to allow the exploitation of any large
Q surface of land by a single individual unless other overwhelming reasons make this highly desirable.
The almost compelling case of land ceiling arises from the absolute and permanent shortage of land in
relation to the population dependent on it, the limited prospect of transfer of population to non-
agricultural occupations or and the need to step up production along with increase in employment.
Economic Rationality of Land Ceiling:
According to some economists small farms are more efficient than large farms. Prof. C. H. Hanumatha
held the view that small farms provide more employment opportunities. They require less capital
compared to the large farms. He further added that small farms can be made into large farms through
cooperative effort so as to have scale economies.
Social Rationality of Land Ceiling:
In a poor country like India the supply of land is limited and number of claimants is large. Hence it is
socially unjust to allow small number of people to hold large part of land. Such condition is against the
justice, equality and prosperity of the majority of the people.
It is socially justifiable to impose ceilings on land and distribute it to the actual users of land, making the
tenants as the owners. In this way, ceilings on land holdings can go a long way in raising income and
bringing prosperity of the toiling masses in the country.
Ceiling legislations in India have been enacted and implemented in all states in two phases. The first
phase continued upto 1972. The second phase started from 1972. The important provisions of ceiling
legislations constitute (a) unit of application; (b) upper limit for land holdings; (c) exemption and (d)
availability of surplus land and its distribution.
(a) Unit of application:
In the first phase, i.e., prior to 1972, the basis of ceiling fixation was an individual as a unit instead of a
family.
Since 1972, a family has been accepted as the unit of application of ceilings. The family is defined as a unit
consisting of husband, wife and children.
(b) Upper limit for land holding:
In the first phase there were wide variations in the ceilings on land holdings. Different states fixed
different upper limits for land holdings. For example, in Andhra Pradesh, the limit of ceiling varied from
27 to 216 acres. In Rajasthan it varied from 22 to 366 acres.
Under the new revised policy, the upper limit of ceiling has been lowered. For example, for lands which
have assured supply of water and where at least two crops are raised, the upper limit has been fixed at 10
to 18 acres depending on the productivity of the land. In areas where there is irrigation provision only for
one crop, the ceiling has been fixed at 27 acres. However, for the remaining types of land, the ceiling limit
is fixed at 54 acres.
(c) Exemptions:
Certain types of land were exempted from ceiling laws. Among the types of land exempted were orchards,
grazing lands, sugar-cane fields of sugar factories, cooperative farms etc.
(d) Surplus land and its distribution:
The progress in respect of surplus land and its distribution has been quite unsatisfactory. The sixth plan
target was that the entire surplus land was to be taken possession of and distributed by 1982-83. But this
is far from being achieved still.
A number of factors such as illegal transfer of land, judicial interventions, loopholes in ceiling laws, non-
availability of land records, inefficient administration, political pressure etc. account for the failure of the
land ceiling. Prof. M.L. Dantwala rightly observed, By and large, land reforms in India enacted so far .
are in the right direction, and yet due to lack of implementation the actual results are far from
satisfactory.
4. Consolidation of Holdings:
Consolidation of Holdings means bringing together the various small plots of land of a farmer scattered
all over the village as one compact block, either through purchase or exchange of land with others. The
average size of holdings in India is very small. The size of the holdings is decreasing but number of
holdings is increasing over time. This is due to the inheritance laws.
The inevitable consequence of this inheritance law is that farms are being subdivided and fragmented
with every passing generation. Further there is a decline of joint family system which was prevailing in
earlier period.
Nuclear family system is now leading to sub-division and fragmentation of holdings. Subdivision and
fragmentation of holdings results in several disadvantages such as wastage of land, difficulties in land
management, difficulty in the adoption of new technology, disputes over boundaries, disguised
unemployment, low productivity etc.
Advantages of Consolidation of Holdings:
Consolidation of holdings has several advantages. They are as follows:
(a) It prevents the endless subdivision and fragmentation of land holdings.
(b) It saves the time and labour of a farmer.
(c)It effect improvement on land in the form of bunding, fencing etc.
(d) It promotes large-scale cultivation.
(e) It brings down the cost of cultivation and reduces litigation among farmers.
Attempts have been made in India for consolidation of holdings long before independence in some areas.
It formed an integral part of our land reforms policy since the inception of on the Planning in 1951.
However, as yet 15 of the 25 states in the comp country have passed laws in respect of consolidation of
holdings.
In Orissa, the Consolidation Act was passed in 1972. The work of consolidation has been completed fully
in Punjab and Haryana. Considerable progress has also been made in the states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar,
Gujarat and Karnataka. So far 51.8 million hectares of land have been consolidated in the country. This is
about one- third of the total cultivated land.
There are various obstacles to the speedy implementation of the consolidation programme. These are
poor response from cultivators, wide variation in the quality of land, complicated process of land
consolidation, lack of enforcing machinery, lack of political will etc.
5. Co-operative farming:
It has been advocated to solve the problems of sub-division and fragmentation of holdings. In this system,
farmers pool their small holdings for the purpose of cultivation and reap benefits of large scale farming.
The advantages of scientific farming, adopting the new potential technologies can be reaped; co-operative
farming lays the foundation of strong democracy, self-help and mutual help. In the Indian context joint
co-operative farms and service co-operatives are mostly observable.
Co-operative farming in India has largely been a failure. The reason is not far to seek. The farmer in India
has not been properly socialised in the cooperative system. Again, the attitude of the bureaucrats towards
cooperative farming is not favourable.
6. Bhoodan Movement:
The Bhoodan Movement was spearheaded by Acharya Vinoba Bhabe. He collected land from the rich
landlords and distributed that to the landless. About 4.2 million acres of land were received under
Bhoodan, but so far only about 1.3 million acres have been distributed.
7. Compilation and updating of land records:
Compilation and updating of the land records are an essential condition for the effective implementation
of land reforms programme. In recent years the states have been urged to take all measures for updating
land records with the utmost urgency by adopting a time-bound programme. Efforts are also being made
to maintain the land records through computerization.
Causes of failure of land reforms:
There are a number of causes for the failure of the programmes of land reforms. They are as follows:
1. Undue advance publicity and delay in enacting land laws:
Much publicity has been given in advance by the leaders of the ruling party to the proposed land reforms
after independence. Again, the time taken for a bill to become an Act in many states has been unusually
long.
This has enabled the landowners to make necessary adjustments so as to be able to evade various
provisions of land reform legislation. According to the World Bank, We have, for an unduly long time,
continued to preach land reforms rather than practise them and this has proved counterproductive.
2. Loose definition of the term personal cultivation:
The term Personal cultivation is quite loose. One could resume land for personal cultivation under the
definition even while sitting at a distance of 200 miles. The Zamindars have been permitted to possess
substantial areas of land for cultivation. Again, the laws have provided for many exemptions in the form of
land awarded for gallantry, land under orchards, tea estates, well-run farms etc.
There are instances when people have availed benefits from some of these concessions, e.g., exemption on
the basic of the land being under orchard, by growing only a few berry trees in a particular plot. In this
way, loose definition of the term Personal cultivation has given chances to Zamindars to eject large areas
of land by defying the law.
3. Optional nature of the laws:
Most of the laws granting ownership rights to tenants are not mandatory. They are rather optimal. The
tenants have to move the government for grant of ownership rights. They will not get them automatically.
On many occasions, tenants hesitate to approach the law courts for this purpose merely out of fear of the
landlords.
Cohen rightly observes, The existing lower or weak position of the tenant would not have been a
handicap in the amelioration of his conditions if the law had been a bit kind to him. The law drags him
into the court on every occasion.
4. Malafide transfer of land:
To escape the laws relating to land ceilings, the Zamindars have indulged in large scale transfer of land to
their family members or kinsmen. Such Malafide transactions do not make any change in the operational
aspect of agriculture.
5. Lack of social consciousness among the tenants:
Prof. Khusro in his study entitled Economic and Social Effects of Jagirdari Abolition has emphasised the
importance of social consciousness of the tenants as a factor responsible for the successful
implementation of land reforms.
The capacity of the tenants to fight for their right also counts a lot in the context of land reforms. M.L.
Dantwala rightly observed, Large holders, articulate and capable, organised pressure in defence of their
interests and the small cultivators and the landless were not only unorganised but in most cases, ignorant
of legal and constitutional process; the former were very often successful in getting the land reforms
modified or even nullified both at the stage of legislation as well as implementation.
6. State side with the big farmers:
N. C. Saxena has rightly observed that the state governments which control the land operations have
moved favourably towards the big farmers. The interests of the small farmers have been vitally affected.
7. Lack of strong political will:
The programme of land reforms necessitates adequate political desire, zeal and support. But
unfortunately the political leaders only wear a mask of progressive socialistic outlook. In this regard, the
report of the Task Force on Agrarian Relations deserves mention. The report says Enactment of
progressive measures of land reforms and their efficient implementation call for hard political decisions
and effective political support, direction and control.
But in reality, this important factor is lacking and often standing in its way. The lack of political will is
amply demonstrated by the large gaps between policy and legislation and between law and its
implementation.
In no sphere of public activity in our country since independence has the hiatus between precept and
practice, between policy pronouncements and actual execution been as great in the domain of land
reforms.
8. Bureaucratic corruption:
It is an acknowledged fact that whenever some honest officials implement the laws relating to land
reforms sincerely, they incur the wrath of the political leaders who ultimately put them in unnecessary
difficulties.
Land reforms provide a golden opportunity to the Patwari and other functionaries of the Revenue
Department to make money. Again in many cases the highly placed officials are themselves landlords.
Moreover, the lands which are acquired to be distributed among landless farmers are engrabed by the
politicians and bureaucrats at cheap rate. Indian Rural Development Report (1999) rightly observes, It is
paradoxical that a bureaucracy created to govern a colonial feudal system was entrusted to implement
agrarian reform and element of all those policies which were inherently anti-feudal, progressive and
democratic.
9. Surplus land is fallow and uncultivable land:
The holders of surplus land manipulate the land data in such a way that the land in excess in their
possession is usually barren and uncultivable. Such a surplus land does not yield any benefit to the
landless peasants. In this way the very purpose of land reforms legislation is defeated.
10. Absence of records:
Absence of records regarding ownership and possession of land and about its actual cultivators stands in
the way of properly identifying the beneficiaries of land reforms.
11. Lack of uniformity in land reforms laws:
Land reforms laws are not uniform throughout India. They are different in different states. This also
accounts for the slow progress of land reforms measures.
12. Emergence of new agriculture technology:
The new seed-cum-fertilizer technology, for its successful adoption, needs ample resources and dynamic
entrepreneurship. Only large farmers can fulfill these conditions. Hence on this count many economists
have come out in favour of the abolition of ceiling on land holdings.
A number of remedial measures have been made to remove the difficulties and structural constraints
pertaining to land reforms in India. They are as follows:
1. The definition of personal cultivation in land legislation should be changed keeping in view the interests
of landless farmers.
2. The residential qualification should be made compulsory for holding land.
3. Excess land taken over from big landholders should be distributed expeditiously. To assist the land
reform beneficiaries, there is a strong need to link them for timely supply of inputs and investment to
Jawahar Rozgar Yojana Prime Ministers Rozgar Yojana.
4. Updating and computerization of land records should be accorded top priority. Necessary funds should
be made available to the states for this purpose. Certified extract of the record should be issued in the
form of updated Farmers Passbook.
5. Special attention should be paid to tribals. All left out agricultural land held by the tribals should be
regularized at the earliest opportunity.
6. No transfer of agricultural land should be permitted to a non-agriculturist.
7. The state should identify wastelands, both public and private, and take up reclamation measures in
these wastelands and distribute them among the poor.
8. Loans should be granted to the farmers under easier terms and conditions so that they can purchase the
lands which are due to them.
9. Joint or community farm management among the marginal land holders and marginal farmers in the
country should be encouraged.
10. The administrative machinery should be kept free from unnecessary political interference and
harassment.
11. The poor peasants should be provided legal aid upto the level of the Supreme Court. The Lok Adalats
should be empowered to dispose of land reform litigations along with prompt disposal of cases by rural
courts, i.e., Nyaya Panchayat/Rural Nyayalaya.
12. Strong political will should be created so that the government can achieve the goal of egalitarian
society through the instrumentality of land reforms.
13. Landless, small and marginal farmers representatives should be given representation in local
Panchayat bodies and ministries so that they are associated at each decision making level.
14. The rural peasants should be made conscious about their on rights through different educative
programmes and media.
15. Peasant organisations should be formed to protect the interests of small and marginal farmers.
Through such organisations they can file claims for conferment of ownership right and can fight against
exploitation.
16. Scientific studies of agrarian structure of different areas separately should be conducted at regular
intervals. Since the problems of one region differ from that of the other, the findings of these studies
should be utilised to bring about a change in desired direction.
In fine, in a country like India characterized by a tradition of inequality and exploitation of the poor, the
land reform measures can lead to a real burst of enthusiasm, a genuine release of energy among the
working peasantry. What it needs is the proper implementation of land reforms. There are two barriers
that hinder proper implementation (i) ignorance of the poor, and (ii) selfishness of the rich.
In order to remove these hindrances the poor should be motivated through education and persuasion and
the rich should be compelled to cooperate through coercion, it certainly requires a government with
strong political will and a bureaucracy with commitment to achieve the desired results.
Read this article to get information about the system of Land Tenure in Pre-Independent
India!
The land tenure system has a long history of its own. There are references to it even in the Arthashastra
of Kautilya. As stated in Arthashastra, the king was the sole proprietor of the land. According to other
scriptures, the tiller of the land was practically regarded as the real owner of the land. The king only had
the power to increase or decrease the land tax.
The ancient system of land tax continued even during the Muslim rule with some modifications here and
there. In the 16th century, Sher Shah Suri initiated land settlement operations for assessment and
collection of land revenue. During the reign of Akbar, there was some improvement in the system.
The British rulers inherited a well-laid-out land system from the Mughals. The British administration
modified or transformed the prevailing land tenures in such a manner as to secure the maximum revenue
for the government from land tax. These changes resulted in the development of three types of land
tenure systems.
1. The Zamindari System:
The Zamindari system was introduced by Lord Cornwallis in 1793 with a view to increasing the revenue of
the East India Company. Under this settlement, the landlords were recognized as the full proprietors of
the land. In return for this honour, the task of collecting rent from the farmers was entrusted to them.
The Zamindars became the intermediaries between the cultivators and the State. But with the passage of
time, the Zamindari settlements made these intermediaries the owners of land thereby creating a
permanent interest in land. Zamindari settlements were of two types. They consisted of permanent
settlement and temporary settlement.
(i) Permanent Zamindari Settlement:
The permanent settlement fixed land revenue on a permanent basis. This system prevailed in Bengal,
Bihar, Orissa, North Madras, Banaras and in some parts of Assam.
(ii) Temporary Zamindari, Settlement:
So far as temporary settlement was concerned, land revenue was assessed for a period ranging between
20 and 40 years in various states. This system was in vogue in Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan, Madhya
Pradesh and Oudh. Since the period of assessment was pretty long, temporary settlement was not
temporary in the true sense.
The British Government pleaded that the Zamindars represented the most enlightened section of the rural
population. As such the conferment of tenurial rights on them could result in significant improvement
pertaining to land and agriculture. But these expectations were not materialised. The Zamindari system as
it worked in India suffered from a number of defects. They are as follows:
(a) Hindrance to Agricultural Development:
The Zamindari system worked as a formidable obstacle in bringing about economic transformation in
rural India. The Zamindars evinced no interest in the improvement of either land or cultivation.
Collection of revenue was their sole interest.
(b) Problem of Absentee-landlordism:
The Zamindari system supposedly introduced to promote progressive agriculture, degenerated into
absentee landlordism. Absentee landlordism signifies conferment of a right of the sharing of the produce
of the land on a few without participating personally in the productive process. The very creation of the
section of absentee landlords resulted in the decay of the agriculture.
Ruddar Datt and K. P. M. Sundharam succinctly observe, Historically, the landlords as a class are known
for their extravagance on women, wine and vices. The landlords of India were no exception. Thus the
money extracted from the cultivators by these parasites did not result in capital formation but increased
conspicuous consumption.
(c) Exploitation:
The Zamindari system itself was based on exploitation as it conferred unlimited rights on the Zamindars
to extract as much rent as they wished. Approximately, one-fourth of the produce was taken away by the
intermediaries in the form of rent.
Moreover, the tenants had to work in the houses of Zamindars on occasions like marriage, religious
festivals without any return.
(d) Psychological insecurity:
Under the Zamindari system the actual tiller of the land was not the owner of the land. Hence he was
always in fear of his ejection from the land.
2. Mahalwari System:
This kind of tenancy was introduced during the British rule. It was first introduced in Agra and Oudh and
later on in Punjab. Muslim tradition was instrumental in the emergence of the Mahalwari system.
So far as the Mahalwari tenure was concerned, the village lands were held jointly by the village
communities. The ruralites were jointly and severally responsible for the payment of land revenue.
The lands held by the village communities were either cultivated by the members of the village
communities themselves, or were leased out to others on rent. Period of settlement, fixation of the land
revenue etc. were different in different mahalwari areas.
The village headman was entrusted with the responsibility of collecting the land revenue and depositing it
in the treasury.
In return he received 5 per cent as commission. The greatest drawback of the Mahalwari system was that
through the presence of certain intermediaries it contributed to the presence of absentee landlords.
3. Ryotwari System:
The Ryotwari system was introduced by Sir Thomas Munro in 1792. Under this system, the responsibility
of paying land revenue to the government was of the individual ryot himself. There was no intermediary
between him and the state. The ryot or the farmer had full rights on land regarding sale, transfer, sub-let
or lease as long as he paid land revenue to the government.
The first Ryotwari settlement was made in Madras in 1972. It was later extended to Maharashtra. Assam,
Punjab, Coorg etc. The system was the product of Hindu tradition.
Advantages:
1. The system was successful in abolishing intermediaries.
2. The proprietor of the land evinced keen interest in improving the land and other associated facilities.
Disadvantages:
1. The ryotwari system through sub-letting encouraged the practice of absentee landlords.
2. Through the provision of mortgaging, the system has given rise to a new zamindar class with all its
exploitative practices.
3. The method of assessment of land revenue, undertaken periodically by settlement officers, was
arbitrary. As a result the ryot with small holdings suffered heavily in periods of irregular monsoons,
droughts.
The integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) was launched in 1978-79 in
order to deal with the dimensions of rural poverty in the country. The programme covered
small and marginal farmers, agricultural workers and landless labourers and rural craftsmen
and artisans and virtually all the families of about 5 persons with an annual income level
below 3500. The main aim of IRDP was to raise the levels of the BPL families in the rural
areas above the poverty line on a lasting basis by giving them income generating assets and
access to credit and other inputs. The programme was to be implemented by District Rural
Development Agency (DRDA) with the assistance from block level machinery. The scheme
for Development of Women and Children in Rural Areas (DWCRA) was launched in 1982 as
a part of IRDP. Both in terms of the volume of aggregate investment planned and the number
of families to be benefitted, the IRDP was the largest programme of the Sixth Five Year Plan
for the alleviation of poverty in rural areas. Keeping this in view, at the instance of Ministry
of Rural Reconstruction*, the Programme Evaluation Organisation(PEO) decided to
undertake an All India Evaluation Study of this programme during 1983-84. The study report
was brought out in May, 1985.


Wikipedia-IRDP
The Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) is a rural development program of the
Government of Indialaunched in financial year 1978 and extended throughout India by 1980. It is a
self-employment program intended to raise the income-generation capacity of target groups among
the poor. The target group consists largely of small and marginal farmers, agricultural labourers and
rural artisans living below the poverty line. The pattern of subsidy is 25 per cent for small farmers,
33-1/3 per cent for marginal farmers, agricultural labourers and rural artisans and 50 per cent
for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes families and physically handicapped persons. The
ceiling for subsidy is Rs.6000/- for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes families and the
physically handicapped; for others, it is Rs.4000/-in non-DPAP/non-DDP areas and Rs.5000/- in
DPAP and DDP areas. Within the target group, there is an assured coverage of 50 per cent for
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 40 per cent for women and 3 per cent for the physically
handicapped. Priority in assistance is also given to the families belonging to the assignees of ceiling
surplus land, Green Card holders covered under the Family Welfare Programme and freed bonded
labourers.
RDP is a major self-employment programme for poverty alleviation. The objective of IRDP is to
provide suitable income-generating assets through a mix of subsidy and credit to below-poverty-line
families with a view to bring them above the poverty line. A family with an annual income of Rs.
20,000/- and below per annum is considered to be below the poverty line based on the 1998 below
Poverty Line Census. The list of individual and family activities which are eligible for assistance with
the unit cost of each is placed in Annexure.
The aim is to raise recipients above the poverty line by providing substantial opportunities for self-
employment. During the 7th five-year plan, the total expenditure under the program was Rs 33.2
million, and Rs 53.7 million of term credit was mobilized. Some 13 million new families participated,
bringing total coverage under the program to more than 18 million families. These development
programs have played an important role in increased agricultural production by educating farmers
and providing them with financial and other inputs to increase yields.
[citation needed]

The objective of IRDP is to enable identified rural poor families to cross the poverty line by providing
productive assets and inputs to the target groups. The assets, which could be in primary, secondary
or tertiary sectors, are provided through financial assistance in the form of subsidy by the
government and term credit advanced by financial institutions. The program is implemented in all the
blocks in the country as a centrally sponsored scheme funded on 50:50 basis by the centre and the
state. The scheme has been merged with another scheme named Swarnajayanti Gram Swarozgar
Yojana(SGSY) since 01.04 1999.
The scheme was introduced because the Government of India realized that the piecemeal efforts in
the sphere of rural development had not achieved the targeted objectives. The IRDP was proposed
to provide self-employment opportunities to the rural poor through provision of capital subsidy and
bank credit so as to help rural poor acquire productive income-generating assets and training to
upgrade their skills.

Short notes on Integrated Rural Development Programme in India
Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) aims at providing assets and self-employment
opportunities for the rural poor. Assistance under IRDP is given to a target group of rural poor
belonging to families below poverty line in the form of subsidy by the Government and term credit by
financial institutions.
The target group under IRDP consists of small and marginal farmers, agricultural labourers, rural
artisans, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes and socially and economically backward classes
having annual income below Rs. 11, 000 defined as poverty-line for the Eighth Plan.
In order to ensure that benefits under the programme the more vulnerable sectors of the society,
stipulated that at least 50 per cent of assisted fa- should "be from scheduled castes and ached tribes
with corresponding flow of resources tot' Furthermore, 40 per cent of the coverage should of women
beneficiaries and three per cent of co age should be of handicapped persons.
The optional strategy of IRDP intended to follow the 'ha hold approach' rather than 'individual
approve The poorest households are identified and the anomic upliftment of these households is soar
through a package of activities involving allowing members, with particular attention being given to
women.
The IRDP is implemented through Dis" Rural Development Agencies (DRDAs) and Level Agencies at
the grass roots level. The giving body of DRDAs includes local MP's, ML Chairman of Zila Parishads,
heads of district development departments, representatives of SCs/ and women.
At the grass-root level, the blocks is responsible for implementation of the program The State-Level
Coordination committee (SL monitors the programme at State Level whereas Ministry of Rural Areas
and Employment is risible for the release of Central share of funds, poll formation, overall guidance,
monitoring endive' action of the programme.
Some of the import" integrated rural development programmes inch National Rural Employment
Programme (NT7 Minimum Needs Programme (MNP), Training Rural Youth for Self-employment
(TRYSEM, 197 Development of women and Children in Rural A (DWCRA, 1982), Indira Awaas
Yojana (IAY, 198 86),SwarnajayantiGramSwarojgarYojana, Prad Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana,
Sampoorna Gram Rozgar Yojana and National Food for Work grammar etc.
The IRDP was first proposed in the Cent budget of 1976-77. The programme with some notifications
was introduced on an expanded scale 1978-79, beginning with 2300 blocks. Another 3 blocks were
added during 1979-80.
Till March 19 under IRDP. 527 lakh families have been assisted with a total investment of Rs.
30,871.79 crore. In the Tenth Five Year Plan a sum of Rs. 76,774 crore has been allocated for rural
development (ef. Ninth Plan Rs. 42,874 crore). IRDP is a centrally-sponsored scheme with funds
shared on 50: 50 bases between the Centre and the states. In the case of union territories, cent per
cent funds are provided by the Central Government.
The programme is implemented through District Rural Development Agency (DRDA) and block-
level functionaries at the grass root level. Following are some of the schemes undertaken under the
IRDP.
1. Training of Rural Youth for Self-Employment (TRYSEM)
It was launched as a centrally sponsored scheme on 15 August 1979. It aims at providing basic tech-
nical and managerial skills to rural youth in the age- group of 18-35 years from families below the
poverty-line to enable them to acquire skills and technology to take up vocations of self-employment
in agriculture and allied activities, industry, services and business.
Liberalization of norms for expenditure under recurring assistance, greater emphasis on systematic
marketing and exploring possibility of setting up groups for manufacture/ assembly of non-
traditional items for which there is good demand in the market, are some of the steps taken to
improve the implementation of the scheme.
After the training, the TRYSEM beneficiaries are assisted under the IRDP. Between 1980-98 a total
of 41, 48,425 rural youths were trained of which 17, 74,395 belonged to SCs/STs and 19, 12,514 to
women categories among these trained youths 23, 32,274 are now employed.
2. Scheme for Rural Artisans
Supply of improved tool-kits to rural artisans is also a supporting component of IRDP. The objective
is to enable the rural artisans to enhance the quality of the product, increase the production and their
income with use of improved tools. Between 1992-93 and 1997-98 7.46 lakh tool kits have been
provided under the scheme incurring an expenditure of Rs. 147.95 lakh.
3. Development of Women and Children in Rural Areas (DWCRA)
This programme aims at raising the income level of women of poor households so as to enable their
organized participation in social development towards economic self- reliance.
It envisages formation of groups of 5-10 rural women each for carrying on income generating
activities. Nacho group is sanctioned a 'revolving fund' of Rs. 15,000 which is shared equally by
Centre, State government and UNICEF.
The aim is to improve women's access to basic services of health, education, child care, nutrition,
water and sanitation through the strategy of group formation. Between 1980-81 and 1997-98 a total
of 2, 19,620 groups have been formed extending the benefit of the programme to 35, 00,247 women.
4. Council for Advancement of People's Action and Rural Technology
The Council for Advancement of People's Action and Rural Technology (CAPART) was registered
under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 on September 1, 1986, with headquarters in New Delhi. It
aims at encouraging, promoting and assisting voluntary action for enhancement of rural prosperity.
It makes available financial assistance to voluntary organizations (VOs) under the following
schemes: (i) promotion of voluntary action in rural development, (ii) development of women and
children in rural areas (DWCRA), (iii) accelerated rural water supply programme (ARWSP), (i v)
central rural sanitation programme (CRSP), (v) organization of beneficiaries of anti-poverty
programme, (vi) integrated rural development programme(IRDP), (vii) Jawahar Rozgar Yojna (JRY)
consisting of watershed conservation and development programme, village link road, rural housing
and social forestry, (viii) advancement of rural technology scheme (ARTS), (ix) Panchayati Raj (PR),
(x) Indira Awaas Yojna, (xi) Million wells scheme, (xii) support to NGOs / VAs, and (xiii) watershed
development.
It can obtain funds from various Central and State government departments and also accept dona-
tions and contributions from other sources.
It has set up 9 regional committees at Jaipur, Ahmadabad, Hyderabad, Bhubaneshwar, Patna,
Chandigarh, Dharwad Guwahati and Lucknow which are empowered to sanction projects up to an
outlay of Rs. 10 lakhs.
5. Jawahar Rozgar Yojna
Jawahar Rozgar Yojna (JRY) is one of the major wage employment programmes of the Ministry
taken up in April 1989 after merging the earlier wage employment programmes, namely, National
Rural Employment Programme (NREP) and Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme
(RLEGP).
The main objective of the programme is to generate additional gainful employment for the
unemployed and under-employed men and women in the rural areas as well as creation of
community assets.
The expenditure of the programme is shared in the ratio of 80: 20 between the centre and the states.
22.5 per cent funds are earmarked for SCs/ STs at all levels of Panchayati Raj institutions. Preference
to parents of child labour withdrawn from hazardous/ non-hazardous occupation who are below the
poverty line, to persons with disabilities, distribution of food grains as part of wages are other typical
features of the Yojna.
6. Indira Awaas Yojna
This Yojna aims at providing dwelling units free of cost to the members of scheduled castes,
scheduled tribes and freed bonded labourers living below the poverty line in rural areas.
After 1993-94 non-SC/ST people and the families of the servicemen of the armed and paramilitary
forces killed in action have also been brought under the Yojana. Funds of the IAY are allocated to the
districts in proportion to the SC/ST population in the district. IAY funds are operated by the District
Rural Development Agencies (DRDAs)/Zila Parishads (ZPs) at the district level.
The allotment of the house is done in the name of the female member of the beneficiary household.
As far as possible houses are built in clusters so as to facilitate provision of common facilities. The
permissible construction assistance per house is Rs,.25,000 in plain areas and Rs.27,500 in hilly or
difficult areas. A total of about 129 lakh houses have been constructed since its inception with an
estimated cost of Rs.23, 149 crore.
7. Ganga Kalyan Yojana
This is a centrally- sponsored scheme w has been launched with effect from I February 1 The
objective of the scheme is to provide irrigate through exploitation of ground-water (bore-w and tub-
wells) to individuals and groups of s and marginal farmers living below poverty-line, assistance is
provided through a mix of subsidy Government and term credit by financial intuitions. Special
safeguards by way of earmarking 50 per cent of total funds as well as higher percent age of subsidies
have been provided for the SCs/S the funding pattern is 80:20 between the Cent and the state
government.
8. National Social Assistance Programme
The National Social Assistance Program (NSAP) came into force on 15 August 1995 provide social
assistance to poor households, includes three benefits through (i) National Old A Pension Scheme
(NOAPS)-Central assistance available at the rate of Rs.75 per month to person who are aged 65 years
or more and are destitute; (iii National Family Benefit Scheme (NFBS)-Centre assistance is available
as a lump sum family benefit for households below the poverty-line on the dead of the primary bread
winner in the bereaved family.
The amount of benefit is up to Rs. 5,000 in the case of death due to natural causes and unto Rs.
10,000 in the case of death due to accidental causes; and (iii) National Maternity Benefit Scheme
(NMBS)-Central assistance is available to pregnant women belonging to households below poverty-
line up to the first two live births, provided they are 19 years of age and above. The amount of benefit
is up to Rs.300to be disbursed in one installment 12-8 weeks prior to delivery.
9. Rural Sanitation Programme
This is a centrally- sponsored programme whose main objective is to improve rural sanitation
through the construction of sanitation toilets. It includes subsidy for the construction of sanitary la-
trines and for the conversion of dry latrines into sanitary latrines. The amount of subsidy is increased
to 80 per cent for persons below the poverty- line and is shared equally by the Central Government
and the State Government.
10. Swarnajayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY)
The SGSY is an integrated programme for self-employment of the rural poor which was started on l
April 1999. Its objective is to bring the assisted poor families above the poverty line. The focus of the
programme is on establishing a large number of micro enterprises in rural areas based on the ability
of the poor and potential of each area for a sustainable income generation.
The subsidy allowed is 30 per cent of the total project cost, subject to a ceiling of Rs. 7500/- (for
SCs/STs subsidy 50% and ceiling Rs. 10, 00/-). Half of the Swarozgaris would be from SCs/STs, 40
per cent from women and 3 per cent from disabled person. The SGSY lays special emphasis on the
development of Swarozgaris through well designed training courses and is financed on 75: 25 cost-
sharing bases between the centre and the state. Since the inception of the programme 19.94 lakh
Self-Help Groups have been formed covering 55.98 lakh Swarozgaris. During 2005-06 the central
allocation for the scheme is Rs. 960 crore.
11. Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY)
It is a 100 per cent centrally sponsored scheme launched on 25 December 2000. Its prime objective
is to provide connectivity to all unconnected habitations in the rural areas with a population of more
than 500 persons (in hill, desert and tribal areas population 250) through all weather roads by the
end of Tenth Plan (2007).
So far 41,068 road works of length 1, 24,792.83 km, and covering 39,574 habitations have been
cleared for taking up under the programme. Out of the, 25,478 road works covering 69,013 km have
been completed. A cumulative expenditure of Rs. 9,882 crore has been incurred so far.
12. Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana (SGRY)
The SGRY was launched on September 2001 by merging the Employment Assurance Scheme (EAS)
and the Jawahar Gram Samridhi Yojana with the objective of providing additional wage employment
in the rural areas as also food security, alongside the creation of durable community assets.
The programme is self-targeting with special emphasis on women, SCs, STs and parents of children
withdrawn from hazardous occupations. The annual outlay is Rs. 1 0,000 crore which includes 50
lakh tones on food grains. The cash component is shared between the Centre and the States in the
ratio of 75:25. Minimum wages are paid to the workers through a mix of 5 kg of food grains and at
least 25 per cent of wages in cash.
The programme is implemented through district, intermediate and Gram Panchayats. Fifty per cent
of the funds are to be utilised for infrastructure development works in SC/ST localities. No
contractors are permitted to be engaged. The programme is regularly monitored by reputed institu-
tions and organisations sponsored by the Central/ State Governments.
13. National Food for Work Programme (NFWP)
It was launched in November 2004 in 150 most backward districts of the country, identified by the
Planning Commission in consultation with the Ministry of Rural Development and the State Gov-
ernments. The objective of the programme is to provide wage employment and food-security through
the creation of need based economic, social and community assets. The scheme is 100 per cent
centrally sponsored.
It provides 5 kg of food grains per man-day along with wages in cash. Under the programme priority
is giving to the works on water conservation, drought-proofing and land development. The
Panchayat concerned has a right to inspect and review the progress of the works. The programme is
expected to provide 100 days of supplementary wage employment to one member of each poor
family in rural areas of identified 150 districts of the country.
Urbanisation in India
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mumbai is the most populous city in India, and the fourth most populous city in the world, with a total metropolitan
area population of approximately 20.5 million.
Urbanisation in India was mainly caused after independence, due to adoption of mixed system of
economy by the country which gave rise to the development of private sector. Urbanisation is taking
place at a faster rate in India. Population residing in urban areas in India, according to 1901 census,
was 11.4%.
[1]
This count increased to 28.53% according to 2001 census, and crossing 30% as per
2011 census, standing at 31.16%.
[2][3]
According to a survey by UN State of the World Population
report in 2007, by 2030, 40.76% of country's population is expected to reside in urban areas.
[4]
As
per World Bank, India, along with China, Indonesia, Nigeria and the United States, will lead the
world's urban population surge by 2050.
[2]

Mumbai saw large scale rural-urban migration in the 21st century.
[see main]
Mumbai accommodates
12.5 million people, and is the largest metropolis by population in India, followed by Delhi with 11
million inhabitants. Witnessing the fastest rate of urbanisation in the world, as per 2011 census,
Delhi's population rose by 4.1%, Mumbai's by 3.1% and Kolkata's by 2% as per 2011 census
compared to 2001 census. Estimated population, at the current rate of growth, by year 2015,
Mumbai stands at 25 million, Delhi and Kolkata at 16 million each,Bangalore and Hyderabad at 10
million.
[5]

History[edit]
Pre-modern India[edit]

The Mahajanapadas
The first appearance of cities and urban development in India was around 2600 BCE with the advent
of the Indus Valley Civilisation. The settlement displayed a level of sophistication superior to
contemporary development with its unique Grid plan city layout. During its peak, the city had a novel
sanitation system with a water supply and seweragesystem in place.
[6][7]
Trading helped the city to
flourish and it had significant trade routes with Central Asia and the Middle East.
[8][9]
The city had its
unique system of weights and measures, script, religion and a flourishing crafts industry.
The decline of the Indus Valley Civilisation due to climate change and drought led to a migration
towards northern India in the advent of the Iron Age better known for the Vedic Civilisation.
[7][10]
The
epicMahabharata of this time describes the city of Indraprastha which stood at the present location
of Delhi and served as capital for the Pandavas. This period and its later years saw the rise of
various powerful city kingdoms or republics, known in popular literature as the 16 Mahajanapadas,
such as Kashi, Magadha and Avanti, whose capital cities became powerful through trade and being
notable centres of learning. The prominent among them being Varanasi, Pataliputra (modern
day Patna) and Ujjayini among others.
[11]

The later period, from 399 BCE, became famous with the Maurya empire.
[12]
A detailed account of
life during the time ofChandragupta Maurya is given by the Greek ethnographer Megasthenes in his
book the Indica. The book describes the caste system prevalent at the time that has been deeply
rooted in the present day Indian community, both rural and urban.
[13]
Cities like Takshashila became
renowned in the old world as a centre for higher learning, probably best known for its association
with the strategist and adviser Chanakya who aided the emperor. Takshashila was the terminus of
several major inlands, connecting India and Central Asia.
[14]
In the south, the Pandyan
Dynasty established its capital at Madurai, one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the
world, and boasting a rich cultural and architectural heritage. Port cities such
as Muziris and Tyndis thrived with trade with the Roman empire.
The transition period[edit]
After independence, India faced poverty, unemployment and economic backwardness. The
first Prime Minister of India,Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, focused on the domain of science and
technology, for economic development.
[15]
The mixed economy system was adopted, resulting in the
growth of the Public sector in India.
[16]

Modern India[edit]

V


T


E

Largest urban agglomerations in India by population
(2011 census)
[17]


Mumbai

Delhi
Rank City Name State/Territory Population Rank City Name State/Territory Population

Kolkata

Chennai

1 Mumbai Maharashtra 18,414,288 11 Kanpur Uttar Pradesh 2,920,067

2 Delhi Delhi 16,314,838 12 Lucknow Uttar Pradesh 2,901,474

3 Kolkata West Bengal 14,112,536 13 Nagpur Maharashtra 2,497,777

4 Chennai Tamil Nadu 8,696,010 14 Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh 2,358,525

5 Bangalore Karnataka 8,499,399 15 Indore Madhya Pradesh 2,167,447

6 Hyderabad Andhra Pradesh 7,749,334 16 Coimbatore Tamil Nadu 2,151,466

7 Ahmedabad Gujarat 6,240,201 17 Kochi Kerala 2,117,990

8 Pune Maharashtra 5,049,968 18 Patna Bihar 2,046,652

9 Surat Gujarat 4,585,367 19 Kozhikode Kerala 2,030,519

10 Jaipur Rajasthan 3,073,350 20 Bhopal Madhya Pradesh 1,883,381

The contribution of the agricultural sector to the GDP of India started to decline and the percentage
contribution fromsecondary sector increased. The period after 1941, witnessed rapid growth of four
metropolitan cities in India, which wereKolkata, Delhi, Mumbai, and Chennai.
[18]
The nation's
economy saw a rise due to industrial revolution and the invention of new technologies increased the
standard of living of people living in urban areas.
[19]
The growth of public sector resulted in
development of public transport, roads, water supply, electricity, and hence the infrastructure of
urban areas.
Maharashtra was the most urbanised state in India till 1991, stood behind Tamil Nadu in 2001 and
third after it in 2011, withKerala being first,
[20]
with the urban-total state population ratio. However,
Maharashtra's urban population of 41 million, far exceeds that of Tamil Nadu which is at 27 million,
as per the 2001 census.
[21]

Causes of urbanisation in India[edit]
The main causes of urbanisation in India are:
Expansion in government services, as a result of the Second World War
Migration of people during the partition of India
[18][22][23]

The Industrial Revolution
[24]

Eleventh five year plan that aimed at urbanisation for the economic development of India
[25]

Economic opportunities are just one reason people move into cities
Infrastructure facilities in the urban areas
[26]

Growth of private sector after 1990 .
[27]

Consequences of urbanisation[edit]
Rapid rise in urban population, in India, is leading to many problems like increasing slums, decrease
in standard of living in urban areas, also causing environmental damage.
[28]

The Industrial Revolution in the 18th century caused countries like United States and England to
become superpower nations but the present condition is worsening. India's urban growth rate is
2.07% which seems to be significant compared to Rwanda with 7.6%. India has around 300 million
people living in metropolitan areas.
[29]
This has greatly caused slum problems, with so many people
over crowding cities and forcing people to live in unsafe conditions which also includes illegal
buildings. Water lines,roads and electricity are lacking which is causing fall of living standards. It is
also adding to the problem of all types of pollution.
[30]

Urbanisation also results in a disparity in the market, owing to the large demands of the growing
population and the primary sector struggling to cope with them.
[31]


Urban Unemployment[edit]
The unemployment rates (UR) according to usual status (ps+ss) as obtained from NSS 68th round
(survey period: July 2011- June 2012) for different categories of persons in urban areas of the
country are:
[32]

Category of persons Male Female Person
Unemployment rate (per 1000 persons in the labour force) 30 52 34