Contents
The British occupation of Odisha in 1803 ushered in a new era in the state’s history. Prior to that, Odisha had been ruled by an alien for an extended period of time. They established British administration in Odisha, which had a profound effect on the state. Indeed, the British administration significantly altered the lives of the people of Odisha. Under British administration, Odisha was divided into three administrative units: the ‘Province of Cuttack’ was administered by the Bengal Presidency, Ganjam and Koraput by the Madras Presidency, and Sambalpur by the Central Provinces. Apart from that, there were princely states. Under such circumstances, administrations are naturally incapable of becoming uniform. Additionally, in 1804 the ‘Province of Cuttack’ was divided into two divisions, Northern and Southern, with headquarters located in Balasore and Jagannath (Puri), respectively. Subsequently, in 1816, the headquarters were relocated from Puri to Cuttack for administrative reasons. In 1818, Cuttack also became the seat of the Commissioner, the Revenue Board, and the Provincial Appeal Court. The Commissioner was elevated to the position of Superintendent of Feudal States. In 1828, Cuttack Province was divided into the districts of Balasore, Cuttack, and Puri.
Odisha’s British Land Revenue Settlement
Revenue concerns were prioritised in administration. All three types of land settlement, namely Zamindari, Ryotwari, and Mahalwari, were used in various parts of the country to assess and collect land revenue.
A. Zamindari system
Odisha was occupied by the British in 1803. Permanent Settlement had been in force in Bengal for a decade at the time. The Permanent Settlement recognised zamindars as in perpetuity hereditary proprietors of the soil on the condition that they paid the government’s share of revenue collected from cultivators. Odisha did not adopt the same system in its entirety.
Temporary settlements
The English established temporary settlements in the majority of areas and extended Permanent Settlement to a few Maratha zamindaries. Short term settlements were introduced for eleven years in the following order: one year in 1804-5, three years in 1805-6 to 1807-8, four years in 1808-9 to 1811-12, and three years in 1812-13 to 1814-15. At the conclusion of these short-term experiments, it was proposed to introduce Permanent Settlement on lands that were “in a sufficiently improved state of cultivation to justify the measure on such terms as the government shall deem fair and equitable.”
Zamindaries under regulation
Under the provisions of the preceding regulation, land revenue was settled in perpetuity with the following zamindaries: Darpan, Sukinda, Madhupur, Aul, Kanika, Kujang, Harishpur, Marichpur, Bishnupur, Dampara, Patia, Kalkalla, Chhedra, and Parikud. The East India Company desired to treat the raja of Khurda on the same basis as the zamindars of the preceding estates, but due to the raja’s rebellion in 1804, his estate was converted into a government estate.
In 1805, the government promised that after eleven years of experimental short-term settlements, Permanent Settlement would be introduced in the temporarily settled areas. However, the promise could not be fulfilled because, in 1811 and 1812, the East India Company’s Court of Directors disapproved of the introduction of Permanent Settlement in ‘ceded and conquered territories,’ including Odisha.
Negative consequences of short-term settlements
Short-term settlements proved disastrous for both Oriya tenants and zamindars. While landowners’ tenures were frequently changed, no mechanism was devised to protect peasants’ rights to their land. Revenue was frequently fixed and increased without regard for the true value and capability of the estate. S.L. Maddox later stated that Odisha’s early revenue settlements were a “unfortunate record of assessment based on insufficient inquiry and of the enforcement of inelastic rules for the realisation of inequitable revenues.”
Since 1804, the British have allowed no reduction or remission of revenue in the event of peasants’ inability to pay. Numerous floods and droughts have caused famine or scarcity of food, but revenue collection has continued in accordance with the Bengal Regulations. The British’s early land revenue policy was considered more repressive than that of the Marathas, because the latter permitted revenue remission or reduction in the event of crop loss due to natural calamities.
Due to high assessment and crop failure, landlords were unable to pay revenue to the government for their estates. Revenue arrears necessitated the sale of estates. In 1807, 266 estates totaling more than 3 lakhs in jama were sold. At Fort Wiiliam, Calcutta, estates with a higher jama of Rs. 5,000/- or more were sold. As a result, many Odia zamindars lost their estates, which were acquired by Bengali speculators. Due to the absence of Permanent Settlement, many zamindars sold their estates in 1816-17 to avoid the complications caused by the short term settlements.
Exploitation of Bengali zamindars
Bengali zamindars who acquired estates withdrew and appointed amlas to collect revenue. Those amlas took advantage of the peasants’ ignorance of the regulations and collected rent in excess of the legal amount. Trower, the Collector of Cuttack, observed of their oppression: “This system must have been most ruinous to the country, destructive to the prosperity of the ryots, and one of the gravest evils imposed on the district by the foreign amlas since it came under the British Government.”
The temporary settlement did not conclude in 1814-15, as originally proposed. There were ten additional short-term settlements that lasted until 1837. In 1837, a thirty-year settlement was proposed, and the issue of Permanent Settlement was ultimately rejected. This long-term settlement was reached after an exhaustive field survey and investigation into the individual rights of each landholder and sub-tenant, but the people had already endured considerable hardship as a result of the previous thirty-three years’ short-term settlement.
B. Ryotwari system
In the early nineteenth century, the Ryotwari system was introduced in place of Zamindari in the ‘Ganjam plains’ of Chhatrapur, Berhampur, and Ghumsar. Revenue collection was handled under the system by Company-appointed officials. It guaranteed tenants’ rights to land in exchange for a fixed annual rent. Rent was set at half of net production on an assessment basis. The ryot (peasant-cultivator) had a sense of security regarding his possession. He was given a document called a ‘Patta’ that detailed the amount and type of land he was to rent, as well as the rent he was required to pay. He could deal with his land in any way he pleased without exposing the state to liability.
C. Mahalwari system
Sambalpur district was the first to implement the system. It was a version of the Zamindari System that had been modified. The Zamindars and village headmen both played critical roles in the System. They stood in the middle of a feudatory state’s chiefs and the Mughalbandi area’s proprietor. The district of Sambaipur is divided into two tracts: Khalsa and Zamindari. Whereas the former refers to land acquired directly from the government by village headmen, the latter was a feudal organisation led by Zamindars. Khalsa was comprised of 119 Malguzari, 870 Gauntia, and 16 Ryotwari villages, totaling 1657 square miles. Whereas Zamindars numbered seventeen and covered an area of 3,248 square miles.
Land was leased to Zamindars or Gauntias or Birtias or Umras, as the case may be, for the purpose of collecting revenue. There was some land that was tax-free known as Bhogra, Devottara, or Brahmottara. Bhogra was a favourite haunt of those Zamindars, Gauntias, and certain classes of village servants such as Jhankar (village priest), Chaukidar (watchman), and Nariha (water-carrier), among others.
Brahmottara and Devottara were respectively land grants to Brahmins and religious institutions. The System was not without flaws. The System’s short-term settlement proved to be harassing and costly for tenants. Additionally, the Zamindars and Gauntias abused tenants in a variety of ways. They were deprived of their free labour, dubbed Bethi-Begar. They were required to pay Nazarana (present) in order to obtain Zamindar’s consent to the land transfer. As Sambalpur district was declared a “partially excluded area” under the Government of India Act of 1935, amending the tenancy laws proved difficult.
Odisha’s British Judicial Administration
The British government’s judicial administration in Odisha was efficient. To oversee the administration of justice, one judge was appointed. The people of Odisha were unable to follow the court’s clumsy judicial procedure. Occasionally, laws were slanted in favour of the perpetrator who bribed the am/as and other court servants, as well as the opposing party’s pleaders. The people of Odisha gradually lost faith in the judiciary, which was administered in this land by the British government. Additionally, the same judge served as magistrate. The conquered territories were divided into numerous thanas under the darogahs’ control. To a greater extent, the police were oppressive.
Thus, the establishment of British administration in Odisha had a profound effect on the lives of the Odia people. Under British administration, Odisha was divided into three administrative units. Revenue concerns were prioritised in administration. All three types of land settlement, namely Zamindari, Ryotwari, and Mahalwari, were used in various parts of the country to assess and collect land revenue. Short-term settlements proved disastrous for both Oriya tenants and zamindars. Bengali zamindars exploited Odisha’s tenants. The people of Odisha were unable to follow the court’s clumsy judicial procedure. To a greater extent, the police were oppressive in nature.
Sources and References
1. History of Odisha Vol-I by Dr Manas Kumar Das
2. History of Odisha Vol-II by Dr Manas Kumar Das
3. History of Odisha Vol-III by Dr Manas Kumar Das
4. History of Odisha Sahu, Sahu, Mishra
5. History of Odisha Vol-I by Y.K. Sahu
6. History of Odisha Vol-II by Y.K. Sahu
7. History of Odisha by RD Banerjee
8. Odishara Itihasa by Satyanarayan Rajguru
