How was the Mahalwari System different from the Permanent Settlement?

India’s land revenue system had undergone a lot of changes over time, mainly there were two prominent systems that were implemented during the British colonial rule the Mahalwari system and Permanent Settlement.

What is the Mahalwari system?

In 1822, the arrival of Holt Mackenzie’s Mahalwari system is a land revenue settlement. It let cultivators in a cluster of villages or just one, own and manage the land collectively. How much land each household was entitled to depend on their role in the overall cultivation of the mahal(group of villages).

Individual farmers often fell prey to corrupt and exploitative intermediaries who made payment of taxes a difficult and confusing process. To alleviate this burden, the responsibility for tax payment was shared throughout the community. This approach enabled revenue collection to be more efficient and fair, while also lessening the likelihood of corruption.

What is the Permanent Settlement?

Introduced in 1793 by the British East India Company, the Permanent Settlement was a novel taxation system devised to create steady revenue for landowners. This framework established fixed targets for tax collection and required landowners to assume the role of tax collectors for their tenants. Consequently, the government received its due tax revenue from the landowners.

Unlike the Zamindari and Mahalwari systems that depended on intermediaries, the Permanent Settlement system stood out because of its lack of such middlemen. This set it apart as a distinct system. Consequently, tax collection did not involve any intermediaries.

Landlords being obliged to pay fixed amounts regardless of any fluctuations in agricultural production or yields brought about a substantial rise in taxation rates for farmers, which became a crucial component of this settlement. This caused an agricultural crisis as numerous marginal farmers lost their lands due to their inability to pay taxes.

Differences between the Mahalwari system and the Permanent Settlement

During British rule in India, two major land revenue systems were introduced: the Permanent Settlement and the Mahalwari system. Despite their shared objective of effective revenue collection, the systems were marked by significant distinctions.

In the Mahalwari system – The burden of the tax was paid by either individual cultivators or groups of villages, using a portion of their harvest as payment owed to the government. To account for these payments, the village headman acted as the intermediary and oversaw the collection and distribution of tax for all cultivators in the region.

In Permanent Settlement – Large land tracts under the Permanent Settlement were allocated to intermediaries, who had fixed responsibilities for tax payments to the British government. These intermediaries later became known as zamindars or landlords, who gained authority to collect rent from tenants farming on their lands. In contrast, there was a difference in how the Permanent Settlement managed land compared to other approaches.

Also, Land ownership under the Mahalwari system remained with cultivators, whereas the Permanent Settlement resulted in the transfer of these lands to zamindars who had inherited their rights. This was one of many differences between the two systems.

Why was the Mahalwari system replaced by the Permanent Settlement?

In areas where land ownership and cultivation rights were determined by the responsibility of the community, the Mahalwari system reigned. The system implied that the profits and losses from farming activities were shared among all village members. It eventually led to disputations among various groups regarding the distribution of land and sharing of crops.

Individual property rights were recognized with The Permanent Settlement of 1793, a move by Cornwallis to make revenue collection more stable. In addition to the recognition of individual rights, landlords were made responsible for the payment of taxes. As a result, the revenue collection process became more efficient and the landlords had greater security knowing that their lands were protected as long as they paid their taxes.

The Mahalwari System has been deemed advantageous, however, it was oftentimes subject to unfavourable activities such as malfeasance among zamindars who coerced farmers by means of excessive taxation. Further, due to communal ownership, individuals of diverse religious beliefs encountered problems, resulting in sporadic Hindu-Muslim clashes.

Efficiencies were absent within the Mahalwari system causing dissatisfaction between different communities. Thus, permanent settlements were established to ensure peace between religious groups while collecting revenues more efficiently.

Conclusion

Introduced during British rule in India, the land revenue systems of the Permanent Settlement and Mahalwari system held significant importance. Rather than a uniform taxation method, the Mahalwari system focused on communal land ownership with charges levied on individual cultivators. In contrast, the Permanent Settlement set unchanging tax rates for landlords to pay, who could then transfer the expenses to their tenants.

The Permanent Settlement and Mahalwari system had contrasting effects on Indian agriculture and society, despite being intended to generate revenue for the colonial government. Small farmers found more security and community support under the Mahalwari system, while the Permanent Settlement resulted in landownership among the wealthy becoming more concentrated.