7. Platinum Platform (312-328)

312 Platinum Platform

Princes played a very important role through outthe colonial period in multiple public and private spheres.Many of their subjects regarded them as parental figures(Maa-Baap) and even as deities. The British saw them as‘collaborators’ and trusted ‘allies’ of the empire andpronounced them ‘colleagues’ but stressed their superiorposition from time to time. The position of the princes lackeda clear cut definition, as the relationship between the Britishand the Princes was full of ambiguities. This paper focuseson the psychological pressures princes had to go through tomaintain their role as Maharaja to their people and theirrole as a prince under the British paramount power.

The Concept of Kingship :

The concept of Hindu kingship ruled the minds ofpeople and princes in India. Princes commanded loyalty fromtheir people founded on the concept of kingship.Heesterman argues, ‘no where the problematic character ofkingship is clearer than in the Indian case’.1 He further arguesthat various texts unanimously assign the protection of thepeople and the maintenance of the order of the world to theking.

The Mahabharata stated that ‘whatever a king doesis right, that is a settled rule; because the protection of theworld is entrusted to him’. It further says ‘If the king doesnot properly protect us, we fare very ill; we cannot performour religious rites according to our desire’.2 In Indianpolitical tradition even despotic and arbitrary rule wasconsidered preferable to anarchy.3

Hindus believed that the power of the goddessresided in the throne.4 Copland observes that ‘many Hinduscriptures hold the institution of kingship to be an integralpart of the divine cosmic order’.5 He stresses that numeroustexts support the notion of the king’s divinity and ‘the kingis generally said to be made up of different gods’.6 Thereforea king who is enthroned is in touch with the power of thedeity and was regarded as divine. In a medieval HinduKingship, Ronald Inden declared, ‘a view of the king,handsome, in good health, bathed, anointed, crowned,decked with ornaments, and seated in state was believed tobe auspicious and to please (ranj) the people’. 7 Peopleapproached princes with veneration, as they were humanwith somewhat divine nature.8 The princes thus

Princes and the British Raj- Smt. Hema (Yellapragada) Botlagudur*

commanded a considerable amount of loyalty from theirpeople and this reflects in the peoples’ regard for their princes.Peoples’ regard for princes :

Princes were addressed by their subjects as Maa-Baap 9 (mother and father) and were considered asintermediaries between the subjects and gods10 . Coplandpoints out how Maharaja of Benaras was regarded by hissubjects as ‘venerated representative of Vishwanath’ and wasgreeted with ecstatic cries of ‘Har Har Mahadeva’ wheneverhe passed through the town.11 In the state of Tehri Garhwalprinces were greeted as embodiments of the deity of theshrine of Badrinath.12

Copland argues that people regarded princes as godswhether the prince was a Hindu or a Muslim by virtue oftheir office. Princely subjects (Hindu) believed that royalcommands carried ‘supernatural sanction’.13 He points tosome north Indian Muslim rulers like Hamidullah of Bhopalwho felt discomforted by the ‘uncritical adulation’ he receivedfrom his subjects. Hamidullah told an American reporter,‘my Moslem subjects do not worship me. However myHindu subjects persist in doing so, even though I am aMoslem. According to our teachings, a ruler is blessed byGod and should be obeyed; that is all’.14 Copland pointsout that most of the Muslim rulers were happy to play along.Princes role as Maa-Baap :

Princes, to ensure that they remained acceptable tothe states’ people, relied on various measures like religiousactivities, emphasising their ‘ancient’ lineages, and bypatronising men of piety and old traditions and culturalforms. Copland further argues that princes known for theirreligious learning and piety were held in high esteem. Hepoints out to some rulers who were very religious like GangaSingh of Bikaner whose single day never passed without theardent worship of God, Maharaja Pratap Singh of Kashmir,‘who kept a dozen cows in garden outside his bedroomwindow so he would be sure to see one first thing uponwaking up every morning’, Jey Singh of Alwar, whose ‘publicoutbursts of religious fervour were legendary’ and someMuslim rulers like the Nawab of Rampur, MohammadHamid Ali Khan, who was ‘so dedicated to his Shi’a faiththat he insisted on being buried at the holy shrine of Najafin Iraq’.15 Copland argues that not all rulers were so religious,‘but almost all saw the benefit of conforming to the public

*Leamington Spa, Warwick, UK

313Platinum Platform

religious roles expected of them.’ 16 He refers to a Cambridge-educated student of anthropology, Mayrudhawaj Sinhji,‘whose personal approach to religion was tinged withscepticism; but the prince never for a movement neglectedhis public religious duties or his private ritual obligations asa Hindu’. Copland quotes Mayurdhawaj Sinhji, who says,‘if I was thought not to be a religious person,’ he recalls,‘what I said would have carried less weight’.17

People respected princes not just for their religiousbeliefs, but also due to the old traditions and cultural formsthat they continued to maintain. Barbara Ramusack pointsout that it is ‘common wisdom… that princes helped tomaintain cultural forms such as Indian dance and musicduring the colonial period’. She supports this argument bypointing to the independent government of India, whichestablished a ‘bureaucratic infrastructure that assumedresponsibility from the princes and distributed publicresources to promote indigenous art forms’. However, sheargues that princely activity as cultural innovators has oftenbeen ignored and needs an in-depth study.18

Princes as Collaborators of the British :Many people identified themselves with their

princes’ dynasty. William Burton points out that ‘in thethousand-year-old States of Rajput States of Central Indiathe link between dynasty and subjects is so close, the bondof a common tradition so strong, that the people wouldfind it difficult to contemplate a change of regime’.19 AlfredLyall argues that the Rajput states had a direct link with theHindu kingdoms of the pre-Muslim conquest period andthey reeked of that much-priced essence, ‘tradition’. Hepoints out that ‘the rulers’ pedigrees proclaimed them to bedescendents of the very god kings whose valour wascelebrated in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, whilethe institutions and the practices of the princely court spokeof a world which had not much changed in centuries andwhich, in its essential elements, went back to the very ‘dawnof history’.20 Benjamin Disraeli speaking in the House ofCommons pointed out that some of the princes sat onthrones, which were in being ‘ when England was a Romanprovince’. 21

According to Max Weber, princes exercised‘traditional’ authority, which had its roots in the reverencethat society accords ‘the sanctity of immemorial traditions’.22

Copland opined that the British decided that the Indians‘had a deep, inbred respect for authority especially theauthority of ‘natural’ leaders such as landlords, priests andBrahmins.23 One of the reasons why the British retainedIndian Princes long after they established their paramountcyin India was due to the peoples’ attachment to the oldtraditions, dynasties and rule. This reflects in Curzon’s letterto Lord Hamilton, ‘we have embarked since the Mutiny

upon the policy of sustaining the Native States and Princes.We do so… in the interests of the people, who are supposedto like the old traditions and dynasties and rule’.24 LordLytton in a letter to Disraeli opined ‘politically speaking,the Indian peasantry is an inert mass. If it ever moves at all,it will move, not in obedience to its British benefactors, butto its native chiefs and princes however tyrannical they maybe’.25 Conservative Viceroys, such as Lytton and Curzonadvocated that Indians would only respond to ‘oriental’ formsof government, which valued hierarchy, pomp and traditionalauthority.26 Although Curzon had very little respect forprinces, which is evident in his personal letters to hisfriends,27 he referred to princes as “colleagues”.28 The British,especially after the revolt of 1857, tried to find newcollaborators among traditional elites, such as the IndianPrinces. John Gallagher and Anil Seal point out that everyforeign rule in India depended upon the ‘collaboration, activeor tacit, of powerful local interests… for much of the businessof extracting tribute and keeping the peace, the British alwaysrelied upon the acquiescence of influential Indians preparedto work with the regime’.29 The British were impressed bythe Princes’ ability to command the loyalty of their followersand princes had great advantage over the British. Theypossessed traditional and moral authority as practisingHindus, Muslims and Sikhs and as key ritual facilitators.Copland argues that as foreigners and Christians, the Britishcould only be observers of Indian religious life whereas theprinces, as practising Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs, had apersonal and vested interest in the welfare of their respectivefaiths.30 Princes extended protection of the state to thereligion. They conserved and nourished religion by extendingpatronage to men of piety and religious learning. This isevident in some of the princes’ royal titles. The ruler ofBikaner bore the title Gau Brahmin Pratipalak – ‘Defenderof Cows and Brahmins’; whilst one of the dynastic titles ofthe Dhrangadhra royal house was Dharma Dhurandhar –‘Yoked to Dharma’.31 Copland stresses that this role ofprinces as upholder of Dharma was always ‘implicit andexpected’.Dilemmas of the Princes :

Although princes commanded great respect fromtheir people, to what extent were they autonomous andsovereign? In recent years historians in an endeavour to rescuethe princes from hegemonic accounts of history suggest thatthey maintained a considerable amount of autonomy andpreserved social formations or modified them to fit in thenew political ideas.32 David Cannadine takes such an anti-hegemonic stance in is book Ornamentalism, stressing theimportance of the role played by class over and above thebinary racial divide between ‘us’ and ‘them’.33 He arguesthat British society is complex, with ‘layered, interlocking’


hierarchies rather than a simple division between rich andpoor,34 and ‘when Britons turned their attention to thosewider worlds that they colonized and conquered, it was withthese views of how society was, and of how it should beadministered, very firmly embedded in their minds’.35 Heemphasises class over other analytic categories and pointsout that ‘we should never forget that the British Empire wasfirst and foremost a class act, where individual social orderingoften took precedence over collective racial othering’.36

Manu Bhagwan, in his attempt to grant the princessome agency, argues that it was not only British who couldhandle the system to their advantage but the princes alsomanipulated the system to their advantage. He argues thaton one hand, British constructed the princely states as anoriental ‘other’ to the ‘modern’ British Indian system ofgovernment, and on the other insisted that rulers conformto the rules of ‘good government’, a term which encompassedmuch of the ‘modern’. The princes, he argues, were adept atmanipulating such stereotypes of western modernity andoriental tradition as a means to ward off undue Britishinterference. He focuses on the university movement inBaroda and Mysore which were considered as ‘model states’,the epitomes of ‘progressivism’ and ‘good governments’against which all other princely states were to be measured.37

This anti-hegemonic stance of current historicalwritings have managed to get princes out of a longstandingstereotype as devoted to their own pleasure and exploitersof their people, being mere decorative stooges of Britishimperial power.38 They go a long way in recovering princesas active subjects, presenting comprehensive and well-researched analyses. But how far were the princes‘independent’ and ‘autonomous’ as they suggest? The Britishoften intervened in the affairs of princely states inspite oftheir ‘non interference’ policy and Princes’ political andeconomic activities were constrained by the dictates of Britishcolonial governance.39 Waltraud Ernst and Biswamoy Patinote that the British ‘reforms’ policy after 1857 representeda ‘hegemonic shift’, with ‘emphasis now being put onmeasures that appeared less interventionist, yet hadimportant structural consequences in the political as well aseconomic spheres’.40 As Rowbotham points out that theBritish like the Romans (on whom many British Victorianimperialists modelled themselves) believed that the successfulmanagement of empire depended not on military might buton policing and the law. ‘Military might is useful in acquiringcolonies, but plays little part in maintaining it; the lawsucceeds to that task when it is well managed. When it isnot, imperial continuity is imperiled’. 41

Ernst and Pati argue that British hegemonic strategyencouraged princes to ‘imagine’ themselves as ‘autonomous’inspite of their ‘political impotence’.

The British considered princes as their allies andcollaborators and pronounced them as ‘colleagues’ but nevertreated them as sovereigns. H. H. Dodwell observes that‘the relations of the government of India with the Indianstates offer questions of extraordinary difficulty to thehistorians’.42 He notes that the facts were ‘strangely elusive’and the position ‘full of ambiguities’. He realized thatrelations from the mutiny to the Montagu-Chelmsfordreforms depended not upon the exact wording of treatiesbut upon ‘the circumstances of the time’.43 CharacterizingIndian Princes as independent rulers or comparing theinhabitants of princely states to the subjects of sovereignnations had become merely ‘niceties of speech… devoid ofany significance’.44 Ernst and Pati argue that Britishcontrolled princes by their policies rather than military actionfrom 1858 onwards, which allowed the princes to ‘imagine’themselves as ‘autonomous’ or ‘sovereign’. Princes werelacking in any international status, were referred to assovereigns, but never treated as sovereigns by the British.They lacked the major privileges and responsibilities ofdefence, external affairs and communications. They werereferred to by their people as Maharajas and Maharanis(Kings and Queens) but were described by the British asmere ‘Princes’. Manu Bhagwan notes that their indigenoustitles clearly ‘challenged the royal head of Britain, providingthe additional impetus for Victoria’s title change vis-à-visIndia to Empress’.

British in their pursuit to stress the differencebetween the ruler and the ruled took the aid of a pseudo-scientific racial theory of Aryans. Indological scholars suchas Max Muller proposed a theory that ‘there was an originalAryan homeland in Central Asia’ whose people spoke Proto-Indo-European language. Over the course of time, they‘branched off in two directions; one came towards Europeand the other migrated towards East’.45 Although MaxMuller’s theory faced huge criticism in the west, Britishofficials and Christian missionaries took up his theory inIndia, but adapted it to assert their own racial superiority.46

For Muller, Europeans and Indians were of equalracial status, but this was something that the British in Indiawere not for the most part prepared to accept. They solvedthis conundrum by asserting that European Aryans weresuperior to Indian Aryans. It was argued that while at onetime the latter had been at the forefront of civilisation, nowthey had lagged behind, so that it was the task of the Britishto advance the Mission Civilisatrice in the subcontinent.47

The racial purity of the original Indian Aryans had, moreover,been diluted by later invasions. This theory was backed byleading British officials in India such as James FitzjamesStephens and Henry Maine. Maine declared that ‘allimmigrations into India after the original Aryan


immigration, and all conquest before the English conquest…affected the people far more superficially than is assumed incurrent opinion’.48 They argued that what India reallyneeded was the autocratic rule of a gifted minority. Stephensassured his countrymen that they should not hesitate toproclaim their racial superiority over ‘a people sunk indarkness and superstition’, so as to reform them.49

This theory conferred on the British a supposedlysuperior racial status; it drew a difference between ruler andthe ruled, and justified their rule. Colonial ideologydepended on the construction of an ‘other’ in whosesimilarities colonialism could predicate its high ideals, itsmission of salvation, of civilizing.50 Homi Bhabha rightlypoints out that this ‘other’ had to be different, ‘for it was inthis difference that the rationale for objectification, forexploitation, for domination lay’. He terms this desire for arecognizable but different ‘other’ ‘colonial mimicry’.51

British officials took up this theory and stressed aneed to reform Indians. The British delineated a starkdifference between the backward ‘Oriental’ people and the‘progressive’ West. The process of ‘othering’ justified thecolonial mission to reform. The liberal tools of reforms, ‘goodgovernment’ and ‘western education’ were put forward aslynchpin institutions of the imperial project.52 Metcalfargues that the revolt influenced British policy towardseducation, social reforms, strengthening of the aristocracyby the ‘pro-landlord’ policy, and to a lesser extent upon thestructure of the Indian Government.53

The British accordingly set up educational facilitiesfor the princes, such as Rajkumar College at Rajkot andRajpur, Aitchison College at Lahore, Mayo College at Ajmer,and Daly College at Indore.54 The princes who went to theseColleges were inculcated with ‘modern ideas’. Minority ruleprovided another means to impart such a ‘modern’ educationto the princes. Most of the important states were underminority rule at one time or the other in the later nineteenthcentury. Jyaji Rao Scindia, Tukoji Rao Holkar, the NizamAfzal-ud-Daula all died leaving minors as their heirs.Malharrao Gaekwad of Baroda was deposed and Sayaji RaoIII, a minor, was placed under the instruction of Europeantutors appointed by the Government of India. In this way,they were exposed to ‘modern ideas’. The British officerswho in several cases administered the states during theminority period also seized the opportunity to set upinstitutions in the states modelled upon the institution ofthe British India. Through their policy of ‘reforms’, Britishbrought important structural changes in the states.

The British ‘tutored’ princes were well equippedwith their western education to investigate the half forgottentreaties between their states and the British crown, whichwere mostly inter pares. Princes started to stress Queen

Victoria’s proclamation that British would ‘respect the rights,dignity and honour of native princes as our own’. In practice,however, the princes were sovereign in only a limited sense.For the British, characterizing them as independent rulersor comparing the inhabitants of princely states to the subjectsof sovereign nations had become merely ‘niceties of speechhanded down from other days and now devoid ofinternational signi?cance’.55 Princely states were not anindependent sovereign power that could make treaties oralliances with any other foreign power. Antony Anghie hasobserved that imperial sub-polities lacked internationalcapacity yet possessed it by having independent territories.56

International lawyers had to face a problem whether toclassify the princely states as independent or not, as theywere ‘outside the scope of law and yet within it, lackinginternational capacity and yet necessarily possessing it’.57

He further points out that ‘it was unclear how polities thatpossessed and yet did not possess sovereignty ?t within aschema pairing degrees of civilization with graduatedmembership in international society’.58 The position of theprinces was anomalous.

Princes were venerated by their people and treatedas an ‘equal’ in the British treaties but were expected to professtheir loyalty to the king Emperor or the Queen-Empress ofBritain and had to prove their sincerity of such professions.Princes had to go through tremendous psychological pressuredue to their ambiguous relation with the British and theirrole as Maharaja to their people. To further examine thispoint a short study of Baroda had been taken in this essay.Chavda points out that ‘wherever and whenever Baroda triedto talk from equal platform it had to make a retreat or losea cause or a right’.59

Time and again, Sayaji Rao’s reforms were limitedor compromised by measures that originated in British India.While he was carrying on with the educational reforms inhis state, the Government of India, under Lord Curzonpassed the Indian Universities Act, which increasedgovernmental control over university affairs and it gaveUniversities greater powers of inspection and authority overtheir subsidiary colleges.60 The Baroda College of Sciencewas affiliated to the University in Bombay, which was underthe control of the British. Bhagwan argues that the UniversityAct changed the dynamic of the relationship between theUniversity and the college. The Act gave the Universityextraordinary latitude to interfere with local policies andinitiatives.61 Bhagwan observes that this act not only affectedthe affiliated colleges in the princely states but it had a fairlydevious effect on schools in princely states. This meantsystematic weakening of princely autonomy. So, a proposalfor a separate University of Baroda was made by the Barodastate in 1908. The British blocked any such initiative. The


struggle to establish an independent University in Barodacontinued till the end of the British rule in India. The stateof Baroda established the University in 1949, one day beforethe administration of Baroda was transferred to the State ofBombay.62

Baroda State was also unable to gain full jurisdictionover the railways within its territories. The British assertedcomplete jurisdiction over all railways they constructed inthe princely states. Baroda Government could not exercisejurisdiction even on lines lying entirely in Baroda limits.63

Because of this, the state lost state revenue from customsand transit duties.64 Baroda decided to construct its ownrailways. Baroda hoped that they might be able to exercisefull jurisdiction at least in this respect. But Chavda notesthat ‘all their protests harped upon the question ofjurisdiction… [had] no avail.65 Copland notes that it wassame ‘frustration story in regard to durbars initiatives on seatariffs, salt manufacture… over seas travel… and theresuscitated imperial service troops’.66

Sayaji Rao felt constantly frustrated by suchrestrains. He believed that the development of the state wasconstrained by petty interference from the British and by‘slavish imitation of English models of government; and bythe distrust with which the political department habituallyregarded any departure from the norm’.67 Copland notesthat once Sayaji Rao enquired with some bitterness of LordReay ‘whether the old Rajas who did nothing and werecontent as a rule with women and drink, were notindividually better off than the new (like himself ) who labourand worry themselves without after all being able to effectmuch that is worth affecting?’68 . Sayaji Rao felt that therewas a difference between the promise made by the Britishand their practice.Conclusion :

Princes were venerated by their people and had tofulfil their role as Maa-Baap and gods. This veneration ofthe people along with the concept of the kingship clearlydefined the role of the Princes towards their people. Incontrast to this their relationship with the British was full ofambiguities. Princes lacked a clear cut definition of theirposition when it came to their relationship with the British.British on one hand treated them as ‘equals’ in their treatiesbut expected the princes to pay allegiance to the British crownas feudatories or some times as a mere subjects of the empire.British constantly intervened in the princely states internalaffairs affecting their role/duties towards their people. Theyhad to go through tremendous psychological pressure as theywere caught between their role towards their people asMaharaja and deal with the British restraints at the sametime.

References :1 J. C. Heesterman, ‘The Conundrum of The King’s Authority’,in J.F. Richards, Kingship & Authority In South Asia (Wisconsin– Madison, 1978), p.1.2 Address by the maharaja of Bikaner to the Carlton Club, 29May 1935, Asiatic review, Vol. 31 (January-October, 1935), p.447cited in Ian Copland, State, Community and Neighbourhood inPrincely North India, c. 1900-1950 (New York, 2005), p.51-52.3 J. C. Heesterman, ‘The Conundrum of The King’s Authority’,in J.F. Richards, Kingship & Authority In South Asia (Wisconsin– Madison, 1978), p.52.4 Adrian Mayer, ‘Rulership and Divinity: The Case of the ModernHindu Prince and Beyond’, in Modern Asian Studies, Vol.25, No.4(1991), pp.766-68.5 Copland, State, Community and Neighbourhood in Princely NorthIndia, p. 52.6 Heesterman, ‘The Conundrum of The King’s Authority’, inRichards, Kingship & Authority, p.1.7 Ronald Inden, ‘Ritual, Authority, and Cyclic time in HinduKingship’, In J.E. Richards (ed) Kingship and Authority, p. 54.8 Pamela G. Price, Kingship and political practice in colonial India(Cambridge, 1996), pp. 15-16.9 Charles Allen and Sharada Dwivedi, Lives of the Indian Princes(London, 1984), p. 58.10 Copland, State, Community and Neighbourhood, p.50.11 Note, n.d. on ‘some salient points about Benares State’, NAI,Rajendra Prasad Papers, 8-P/48, Cited in Ibid., p. 52.12 Chief Sec., Tehri Garhwal, to PA, Tehri Garhwal, 17 January1930, IOR R 1/1/2129. ibid p 52.13 Letter from HH of Dhrangadhara to the author, 21 February1998, cited in Copland, State, Community and Neighbourhood,p. 53.14 The New York Times, 11 April 1942, Cited in Ibid, p 52.15 Ibid., pp. 52-54.16 Ibid., p.54.17 Ibid., p.54.18 Barbara N. Ramusack, The Indian Princes And Their States(Cambridge, 2004), p.168.19 William Barton, The Princes of India, 3rd Edn. ( New Delhi,1983), p. 78.20 Speech by the Maharaja of Bikaner to the ladies Carlton club,London, 29th may 1935, The Asiatic review, 31 (Jan-0ct 1935),447 Ian Copland, The Princes of India in the endgame of Empire(Cambridge, 1999), p.23.21 Quoted in B S Cohn, ‘representing authority in VictorianEngland’, in Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger (eds), Theinvention of tradition (Cambridge, 1992), p.184 cited in Ibid.,p.22-23.22 Max Weber, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization(tran. A.M. Denderson and Talcott Parsons, Glencoe Illinois,1947), p.328 cited in Copland, State, Community andNeighbourhood, p.51.


23 Copland, The Princes of India in the endgame, p.21-2224 Adrian Sever (ed), Documents and Speeches on the Indian PrincelyStates, Vol. I (B.R. Publishing corporation, Delhi, 1985), p.347.25 Lytton to Disreli 11th may 1876 cited in lady Betty Balfour,Personal and literary letters of the Earl of Lytton (London 1906),II, 21 cited in Copland, The Princes of India in the endgame, p.21-22.26 For this point see, Maria Misra, Business, Race, and Politics inBritish India, c 1850-1960 (Oxford, 1999), pp. 43-44.27 Letter-Curzon to Lord Hamilton, (29 Aug 1900), India OfficeRecords, Hamilton Papers, Volume 17, no 38, cited in AdrianSever (ed), Documents and Speeches on the Indian Princely states,Vol I, p.347.28 Speeches by Lord Curzon of Kedleston, (Calcutta: Thacker Spink,1901) pp159-165.29 John Gallagher and Anil Seal, ‘Britain and India Between theWars’, in Modern Asian Studies, vol 15, No 3, Power, Profit andPolitics: Essays on Imperialism, Nationalism and Change inTwentieth Century India (1981) pp 389.30 Copland, State, Community and Neighbourhood, p.50.31 Ibid., p.51.32 Ernst and Pati (eds.), India’s princely states, p.3.33 David Cannadine, Ornamentalism How British Saw TheirEmpire (London, 2001).34 David Cannadine, Class in Britain (London, 1998).35 Cannadine, Ornamentalism, p.11.36 Ibid., p.10.37 Manu Bhagavan, Sovereign Spheres Princes, p.5.38 The stereotype appears in Diwan Jarmani Dass, Maharaja: Lives,Loves and Intrigues of Indian Princes (Delhi and Bombay,1970);K L Gauba, His Highness, or the Pathology of Princes (Lahore,1930); this point is noted in John McLeod, Sovereignty, power,control Politics in the States of Western India, (New Delhi, 2007);also in Ramusack, The Indian Princes And Their States,; also inCopland, The Princes of India in the Endgame of Empire.39 Ernst and Pati, ‘People, Princes and Colonialism’, in Ernst andPati (eds), India’s Princely States.40 Ibid., p.4.41 Judith Rowbothom, ‘Miscarriage of Justice? PostcolonialReflections On the ‘Trial of the Maharajah of Baroda, 1875’,Liverpool Law Review, 28 (2007), p.381.42 H.H.Dodwell (eds.), Cambridge history of India, Vol.VI(Cambridge, 1922-).43 R. J. Moore ,Reviewed work(s): British Policy towards the IndianStates, 1905-1939 by S. R. Ashton, Bulletin of the School of Orientaland African Studies, University of London, Vol. 46, No. 1 (1983),pp. 166-168.44 Lauren Benton, ‘From international law to imperialconstitutions; the problem of quasi sovereignty 1870-1900’, Lawand History Review Fall 2008, Vol. 26, No. 3, p.3.45 Thapar, Romila, ‘Theory of Aryan Race’, Social Scientist(January-March, 1996), p.5.

46 Joan Leopold, ‘British Applications of the Aryan Theory ofRace to India, 1850-1870’, The English Historical Review, Vol.89,No.352. (Jul., 1974), p.583.47 Sumit Guha, ‘Lower Strata, Older Races and Aboriginal Peoples: Racial Anthropology and Mythic History Past and Present’,Journal of Asian Studies 57,2 (1998), p.427.48 Ibid., p.427.49 Metcalf, The Atermath of Revolt, p.319.50 Bhagavan, Sovereign Spheres, p. 4.51 Quoted in ibid., p. 4.52 Bhagwan, Sovereign Spheres, p.3. Also see for the liberals viewsin Briton Thomas Metcalf, ‘Liberalism and Empire’ in ThomasMetcalf, Ideologies of Raj, (1998), p.28-58.53 Metcalf, The Atermath of Revolt.54 Ernst and Pati, ‘People, Princes and Colonialism’, in Ernst andPati (eds), India’s Princely States, p.4.55 The Collected Papers of John Westlake, 220 in Lauren BentonLaw and History Review Fall 2008, Vol. 26, No. 3, p. 598.56 Lauren Benton ‘From international law to imperialconstitutions; the problem of quasi sovereignty 1870-1900’, Lawand History Review Fall 2008, Vol. 26, No. 3, p. 597.57 Ibid., p. 597.58 Anghie notes that the problem ‘was never satisfactorily deniedor resolved’, Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making ofInternational Law, 81, cited in Ibid.,p. 598.59 Chavda, Geakwad and the British, p.16.60 Manu Bhagavan, ‘The Rebel academy: Modernity and themovement for a university in princely Baroda 1908- 49’, Journalof Asian studies, Vol.61 No.3 (Aug., 2002), p.920.61 Ibid., 921.62 Ibid., p.943.63 Chavda, Geakwad and the British, p.31.64 British paid the compensations till 1910, but was less thanexpected by the Baroda Government and it went further downafter 1910.65 Huzur Cutchery letter dated 25th March 1911, Raisdent’s replyof July, 1912 and Huzur Cutchery letter of Sept, 1912. P. 25cited in Ibid., p. 34.66 Copland, ‘Sayaji Rao Gaekwad’, in Robb & Taylor (ed.), Rule,Protest, Identity, p. 29.67 Ibid., p. 29.68 Sayaji Rao to Lord Reay (Governor of Bombay), 20 Jan 1897,quoted in Ibid., p.29


Hyderabad state is synonymous with the rule ofthe Nizams. It was steeped in the medieval feudal tradi-tions. Though, the state had the distinction of having aunique cultural identity and religious tolerance, the in-equalities and contradictions perpetuated in the economicsystem. Muslims occupied a predominant position in theadministration, judiciary and other branches of govern-ment but socio – religious inequalities continued in someform or the other. With all those contradictions the stateunder the Nizams tried to establish social justice.

It was free from communal troubles till 1936. Thisphenomenon gradually changed from the third decade ofthe twentieth century due to the rise of communal politicsof the Ittehad-ul-Musalmeen party. The Nizam also cameunder their influence gradually during this period. Other-wise Hindus and Muslims lived together happily withoutany regard to religious differences and each paid respect toother’s religious sentiments leaving unity, tolerance andcommunal harmony among the people in tact.

Mundumula Narasing Rao in his book Fifty Yearsof Hyderabad mentioned that “the repositories of the spe-cial culture and traditions of Hyderabad handed down fromgenerations were there to prevent any damage to theirunique friendly and social atmosphere that always paradedthe city”. Different opinions could be seen on Hyderabadstate in the writings of various scholars. European andMuslim scholars considered it as a ‘centre of oriental cul-ture’, British considered it as a bright ‘jewel of her crown’but the nationalists including Sardar Patel branded it as a‘cancer in the belly of India’. However in the nineteenthand twentieth century, the cultural and intellectual activ-ity was stagnated under the influence of British para-mountcy but the interaction of the British and orientalculture of Hyderabad led to social and cultural transfor-mation in the court as well as outside without the lattertotally losing its basic features. Indirectly even the courtlyceremonies, court practices, culture and education cameunder the continuous influence of the Raj. Western dress,food and language were slowly adopted under the influ-ence of the British culture; consequently catholicity in thesocio-cultural and religious life was prevalent.

Social Justice under the Nizams- Dr. Y. Vaikuntham*

Traditional education was imparted in Madarasas,Maktabs and Khanqis under Ulemas, Sufis and Muslimscholars. The teaching was either in Arabic, Persian or Urdu.The education of the Hindus was given in temples, Mutts,Ghatikas , Khangi and Agrahara schools in Telugu, Marathiand Kannada i.e.; in their mother tongue. English schoolswere established. General, technical and professionalschools with western education gained importance.

The non-mulki influence increased and they wereinducted into a number of plump posts. It was resisted bythe mulkis or local intellectuals leading to friction in thesociety. The general literacy in the state in 1891, 1901 and1911 among the Muslims was 6 %, 5.46%, and 5.9%whereas the Hindus had 3.5%, 5.46% and 2.3% respec-tively. In 1883-84, there were 192 institutions of all cat-egories with 11669 students, whereas by 1910-11 the in-stitutions increased to 1036 and pupils to 66484. Most ofthese institutions were in Hyderabad Suba and district head-quarters. Even by 1951 the literacy varied between 5.09%to 7.2 % in the countryside, though in the city ofHyderabad the literacy rate was 25.2%. Since educationwas backward, people lagged behind in socio-culturalspheres and the process of modernization was very slow.

The Muslims were the ruling class though the ma-jority of population belonged to the Hindu community.caste, superstitions, domination of aristocracy, and feudalchiefs was common in the society. Polygamy was prevalentamong the Muslims. Sati was noticeable, child marriageswere common and widow remarriages were prohibited.However, along with a number of socio-religious organi-zations, the government also took measures to control thesocial evils. Sati in 1848 and selling of children in 1856were banned in the state. Ikwan-us-Sufa, and Anjumen-e-Maref under Mulla Abdul Qayyum were started to take upeducational and social reforms including the developmentof social, intellectual and economic life of the people.Agornath Chatopadyaya and his wife started Anjuman-e-Ikwan-us Sufa( The Brotherhood Society), and Young Men’sImprovement Society in 1879 to bring about social reformsincluding emancipation of women, abolition of child mar-riages and introduction of widow remarriages . He prac-

*Professor (Rtd.), Dept. of History, Osmania University, Hyderabad. Former Vice-Chancellor, Kakatiya University, Warangal.Sivananda Eminent Citizen Awardee.


ticed castelessness by taking depressed classes as his do-mestic staff. He also encouraged inter-caste marriages.

From 1891-92 Arya samaj started gymnasiums,Ganesh utsav to bring about socio-religious awakeningunder the leadership of Kamata Prasad and MahatmaLaxman Desji. Sanatan Dharma Maha Mandal was orga-nized by Arya Samaj under the leadership of KesavraoKoratkar, Satwalekar and Aghoranath Chatopadyaya. Theo-sophical society was established in the last decade of thenineteenth century in Hyderabad.

Encouragement of non-mulkis in various servicesstimulated education and they could bring about educa-tional reforms. Salar Jung 1 invited some very qualifiednon-mulkies from Aligarh, Madras and started compul-sory education for the children of landlords, Inamdars andJagirdars.

Mulla Abdul Qayyums book A Plea for Compul-sory Education written in 1894 was a landmark in the de-velopment of education in the state, though this proposalwas rejected on trivial grounds by the state stating that itwill create anti-government feelings and social protests.However, number of schools and second grade collegescame into existence including Darul-ulum High School,City High School, Chadarghat High School, Madaras-e-Aliya, etc. Along with them a number of missionary schoolslike All Saints High School, Grammar School, WesleySchool, St. Anne’s Convent, Keys High School, MahboobCollege, Nizam College etc. were established. All these in-stitutions helped in the growth of intellectual awakeningin the state. These institutions were established at Subaheadquarters i.e. Aurangabad, Gulbarga, in addition to afew other towns.

Though Urdu was the state language from 1884replacing Persian, English and vernacular schools providedgreater opportunities for education of all including the vil-lagers. All these efforts led to the establishment of OsmaniaUniversity in 1918.

The libraries were the store houses of knowledgeand Library Movement became a cultural movement lead-ing to renaissance in the state. State Library in 1892, SriKrishnadevaraya Andhra Bhasa Nilayam 1901, VignanaChandrika Mandali in 1906, Sri Raja Raja Narendra BashaNilayam in 1904 at Hanamakonda, Andhra SamvardaniLibrary at Secunderabad in 1905 helped not only intellec-tual awakening but also social justice in the state.

However, social, intellectual and cultural activi-ties got stimulus as a result of these movements. Begari orvetti chakiri was removed through a Gasti on 30-3-19232

as the Nizam’s birth day gift. In 1933 government prohib-ited extracting any work without remuneration. RyotSangams and Weavers Associations came into existence.Andhra Kendra Janasangam in 1921 and Andhra MahaSabha in 1930, Maharastra Parishad in 1936, and KarnatakaParishad in 1937 were started to take up cultural activitiesand peoples problems to eradicate social evils and to fightfor social and economic justice.

Andhra Kendra Janasangam has published a num-ber of booklets to eradicate exploitation and to establishsome sort of social justice. They include ‘VarthaSwatantram’, ‘Vetti Chakiri’, ‘Mohtarfa-Maggapupannu’,‘Nazarana Janaparignanamu’, ‘Nizamrastra Andhrulu’,‘Nizam Rastra Abhivrudhimargalu’, etc. They gave impe-tus to the activities of student community to support andpromote social, cultural, economic and political advance-ment in the state. Ravi Narayana Reddy called all thoseorganizations stating that there was no difference betweenpolitical and non-political movements as these organiza-tions sub-served the national awakening.

In the first quarter of the twentieth century theinstitution of Devadasi system, supplying of dancing girlsto officers on tour, practice of vetti etc have been abol-ished. Educational institutions were established and thrownopen to all in addition to Jagirdars, and aristocratic fami-lies. The rise of Arya Samaj and Ittihad-ul- Musalmeen ledto the rise of communal troubles in the third quarter of thetwentieth century. However, the Hindus who constituted86% of the population were not considered for appoint-ment to high positions whereas the Muslims who were aminority were appointed to the plump posts of adminis-tration. Therefore he was criticized as a blind ruler with‘one eye’ though the Nizam claimed both Hindus andMuslims as his two eyes. In the twentieth century the rul-ers gave preference to maintain social order by halting theinstitutions of social change in the state and promotedMuslim aristocracy and non-mulkis in the critical areas ofpower. This was the beginning of dual policy of preferen-tial treatment to Muslims which led to greater tensions inthe later part of the Nizams rule ie; between 1930s and1940s. When the non-mulkis were employed in the stateservices the Urdu and vernacular press protested againstthis policy. As a result of which “the avenues of the stateservices were widely opened to Hyderabadees”. In 1933government issued a Firman giving preference to all edu-cated and efficient mulkis in the services.

In his message on the Silver Jubilee year of coro-nation, the last Nizam visualized the concept of social jus-tice as his vision. He commented that “ I am deeply inter-


ested in village uplift. It is my wish that the life of thevillagers may become increasingly prosperous…prosperityof the country is in the smiling fields and contended peas-antry rather than in stately edifices”. Thus while support-ing absolute monarchy he had sympathy for his subjectsespecially common people. Though, he lacked any knowl-edge of social and political philosophy, he mingled withthe common, poor working people of the court.

The sixth Nizam Mir Mahboob Ali Khan wasmore broad minded in accommodating Hindus and Mus-lims in the power echelons. Also he moved closer to themajority and respected the sentiments of the Hindu popu-lation in the performance of social and religious functionsleading to greater social harmony when compared to thatof the last Nizam. He observed Hindu rituals and performedpuja as per Hindu practices during 1908 floods. All thisexplains that the sixth Nizam gave importance to socialjustice under his rule.

The last Nizam gave importance for the manage-ment of finances, water resource management, includingirrigation, communications, including railways and exploi-tation of the natural resources for the development of thestate and the society. The administrative reforms could notresolve the fundamental differences in the economic andsocial structure of the state and the society. Egalitarian so-cial and economic structures could not be evolved. In factthere were two social segments in the Nizams dominionsie; those who live in Diwani areas and those who live injagir and paigah areas. In Diwani areas some socio-eco-nomic progress was noticeable whereas in jagir areas noth-ing but feudal exploitation of men and matters dominated.It gave rise to Comrades Association and left movementsin the state in 1940s which culminated in the TelanganaArmed Struggle against the feudal atrocities. It is pertinenthere to recall Syed Abid Hasan’s comment on the socio-political situation in the state at that time. He said that“outwardly it presents a picture of peace and contentment.And if you scratch the surface you will begin to see the soreof discontentment that is robbing every Hyderabadee ofhappiness”.

Notwithstanding the political conflicts thatmarked after 1945, there was no hostility between Mus-lims and Hindus in Hyderabad state i.e. between the rul-ers and the ruled. It clearly demonstrates that there mighthave been some issues of intolerance between the majoritypopulation and the ruling community and the rulers, butoverall social justice was noticeable in Hyderabad stateunder the Nizams in the nineteenth and twentieth centu-ries.

References

1. Bawa.V.K; The Last Nizam ; The Life and Times ofMir Osman Ali Khan, penguin books,1992.

2. Hanumantha Rao Madapati; TelanganaAndhrodyamamu, 2 vols, Hyderabad,1949.

3. Narasinga Rao M; Fifty Years of Hyderabad,Hyderabad,1977.

4. Sarojini Regani; Anglo- Nizam Relations,1724-1857;Secunderabad,1963.

5. Sheela Raj ;Medievalism to Modernism: Socio- Eco-nomic and Cultural History of Hyderabad,1859-1911;Bombay,1987.

6. Syed Abid Hasan, Whither Hyderabad?A Brief Studyof some of the outstanding problems of the premierIndian State, Madras,1935.

7. Vaikuntham.Y;Peoples Movements in the Princelystates,Manohar,Delhi,2004.

8. Vaikuntham.Y;Water Resource Management ;Ripar-ian Conflicts,Feudal Chiefs and Hyderabad state,Manohar, Delhi, 2010.

9. Vasikuntham. Y; State ,Economy and Social Trans-formation: Hyderabad State, Manohar, Delhi,2002.

10. Zubeda Yazdani; The Seventh Nizam, The FallenEmpire , CUP,1985


The Movement for Telugu was organized by thepeople living in the eight districts of Hyderabad with anintention to awaken Telugu consciousness and to fight forthe political rights. An attempt is made in this article toexplain the Rise of Telugu Consciousness in Hyderabadduring the various phases of the National Movement.

The Movement for Telugu, especially meant forthe improvement of socio-economic, cultural and politi-cal conditions and to prepare them for the challenges ofmodernization. Such kind of movement was required dur-ing the autocratic rule of the Nizam.

The Hyderabad State was under the Nizam whowas a Muslim and the majority of his subjects were Hin-dus. In those circumstances, it was very difficult to launcha movement in Hyderabad. During the Nizam’s rule, theregion was extremely backward and the people ofHyderabad were groaning under the accumulated weightof poverty, ignorance, oppression and exploitation. How-ever, no serious attempt was made by the nationalists tobuild up a movement against the Nizam and the Britishfor fear of repression.

Since the population of the State was overwhelm-ingly rural in character, the bulk of the Hindu populationwas depending on agriculture. The majority of the ruralpopulation was either landless labourers or small peasants,and the agricultural labourers were subjected to exploita-tion under the existing system of native feudalism. Due tothe poverty and ungainful employment, they were mostlyreeling under stress and strain. The Muslim populationwho were mostly employed by the Nizam’s governmentwere generally urban in character. By virtue of being theruling class, the Muslims generally enjoyed certain privi-leges in the society. But the majority of them were alsopoor. Their economic conditions were also far from satis-factory even under the Nizam. Thus, by the end of 19th

century, the Hyderabad State became a vulnerable groundfor launching people’s agitation.

True to its rural character, the Hyderabad Stateoffered no facilities for educating the masses. A few schoolswhich were opened in Hyderabad city by the end of 19th

century were only serving the needs of the children be-

The Rise of Telugu Consciousness in Hyderabad- Dr. V. Kishan Rao*

longing to the rich and the upper middle class families ofthe Muslim community and few rich Hindu families.Though the Nizam allowed Western education to beadopted in these institutions, he cleverly introduced Urdulanguage as the medium of instruction to dispense withEnglish language in his State and also to kept the Hindusout of the portals of education, as most of the Hindus wereeither Telugus or Kannadigas or Maratties. Even the Hin-dus who wanted to admit their children to these institu-tions had no choice but to accept the imposition of Urduwhich was the official language of the State. However, theWestern education brought a change in the thinking of theeducated class which undoubtedly caused the rise of Teluguconsciousness in the state at the turn of the presentcentury.

When the Indian National Congress was formedin 1885, a few citizens among the intellectual elite drawnfrom the upper middle class strata of society welcomed itsformation. They were Dr.Aghornath Chattopadhyaya,Mulla Abdul Qayum (the first Muslim leader fromHyderabad to join the Indian National Congress),Ramachandra Pillai, a lawyer, and Moheb Hussain andothers. They played a prominent role in moulding publicopinion among the educated few in the State.

The Arya Samaj was established in Hyderabad cityin 1892. The Arya Samaj leaders were prosecuted by theGovernment for being ‘non-Mulkies’ (outsiders) and al-leged that they were involved in anti-Muslim activities. AryaSamaj leaders like Nityananda Brahmachari andVishwananda Saraswati were not only sent to prison buteven their pleader, Ramachandra Pillai was also placedunder Police custody for two hours when he came to visitthem in prison. Notwithstanding these obstacles, the AryaSamaj carried on its activities in the State and some of thenotable persons who joined the Arya Samaj Movement in1896 were Keshav Rao Koratkar, Damodar Satvalekar.Dr. Aghornath Chattopadhyaya also gave encouragementto the Arya Samaj Movement. Falling in line with the In-dian Pattern set up by Bala Gangadhar Tilak Ganesh UtsavCelebrations were also started in Hyderabad in 1895.

The Maharashtra leaders in Hyderabad like PanditKeshav Rao Kuratkar, Vaman Ramchandra Naik and

*Professor, Dept. of Ancient Indian History, Archaeology & Culture, Osmani University, Hyderabad.


Ganpat Rao Hardikar founded the Vivek Vardhini Pathasalain 1906 which later on developed into a leading educa-tional institution in the city. In 1907, Vithal RaoDevalgaonkar, Keshava Rao Kortkar and Garuda Raostarted the Nutan Vidyalaya High School in Gulbarga. TheNutan Vidyalaya High School played a prominent role inspreading education in the Karnataka region of theHyderabad state. The founding of the institution markedthe beginning of the Cultural Revival in Hyderabad.

In spite of the handicaps, the people of Hyderabadcould not remain unaffected by the nationalist sentimentwhich had widely spread over British India. The national-ist impulse to create a democratic and welfare state wasactive in British India while it was a bit delayed in thePrincely State of the Nizam. The task of preparing theHyderabad State for political and social upliftment wasfound to be a stupendous one. The princes were deliber-ately nursed by the British for many years as obstructers tocollective national progress. This policy paid great divi-dends to the British in dealing with anti-British forces.

About this time, several cultural institutions cameinto existence. Leaders like Komarraju Laxmana Rao,Gadicherla Harisarvothama Rao, Ayyadevara KaleshwarRao, inspired by the renaissance movement in Andhra dur-ing the Vandemataram movement, wanted to forge strongcultural links with the people of Telangana. The people ofHyderabad could not remain unaffected by the breeze ofnational renaissance in British India. The first Telugu Li-brary, namely, Sri Krishna Devaraya Andhra BhashaNilayam was started in Hyderabad in 1901. During thesame period two other libraries, Sri Raja Raja NarendraAndhra Bhasha Nilayam and the Andhra Samvardhini Li-brary were founded in 1904 and 1905 at Hanamkondaand Secunderabad respectively. Besides that some more li-braries were started in Telangana region. viz; SamskruthaKala Samvardini, Secundrabad, Mahaboobiya AndhraBhasha Nilayam, Errupalem in Warangal District, Sri SiddiMalleshwara Grandhalayam, Ramidicherla, Warangal dis-trict, Sri Andhra Vignana Prakashini Grandha Nilayam,Suryapet, Nalgonda district, Andhra Saraswathi GrandhaNilayam, Nalgonda, Sri Shabdanushasnandhra BhashaMandiram, Warangal and Sri Maduri RaghavuluBhashakalpavalli, Secundrabad etc

As early as in 1913, the Social Reform Movementwas initiated by the ‘Humanitarian League’. The founder-President of the League, Raja Bal Mukund was a pioneerin the Harijan Upliftment activity in the State. TheHyderabad Social Service League was established in 1915which held conferences in different parts of the State tostress the need for Social Reform. Another conference of

Social Reform was held in Hyderabad on November 11-12, 1921 under the Presidentship of Maharshi Karve. Theproceedings were conducted in English, Urdu and Marathilanguages since most of its members were Maharashtrians.This had been protested by the Telugu speaking membersunder the leadership of Venkat Rao Alampalli which hasgiven rise to founding of ‘Andhra Jana Sangh’ in 1921.

The ‘Andhra Jana Sangh’ which was formed withan initial membership of only twelve on the very night ofNovember 12, 1921, when Venkat Rao Alampalli, an ad-vocate was hooted down for moving a resolution in Telugu.Its membership increased very soon to one hundred. TheAndhra Jana Sangham was formed with Tekmal Ranga Raoas its Secretary. The association was to be called “NizamRashtra Andhra Jana Sangham”, with an intention of work-ing for the progress of the Telugus, convening public meet-ings and allied activities and every Telugu of the State whoseage was not less than eighteen and who could read andwrite could become a member of this association. Whenthe membership rose to one hundred, a regular managingcommittee of 15 members with Raja Rajagopala Reddy,Barrister, as President and Shri Madapati Hanumantha Raoas the Secretary was elected. As an allied wing of this bodya research society called Andhra Parishodhak Mandali wasalso established.

The prominent among them were MadapatiHanumantha Rao, Burrgula Rama Krishna Rao,M.Narsinga Rao and Adiraju Veerabhadra Rao. The firstmeeting was held at Hyderabad under the Chairmanshipof Konda Venkat Ranga Reddy on February, 1922. In thismeeting the name of the Andhra Jana Sangh was confirmedand Madapati Hanumanth Rao was elected its Secretary.Madapati proved to be the guiding spirit of the movementfor the social and cultural upliftment of the Telanganapeople. This was the beginning of the rise of Telugu Con-sciousness in the Hyderabad State. A number of sister as-sociations were established all over Telangana. The neces-sity of getting them federated with a central body was keenlyfelt. Consequently, the ‘Andhra Jana Kendra Sangham’ wasformed at Hyderabad. The first meeting of the central bodywas held at Hanumakonda on the 1st April, 1924 and itwas largely attended by representatives from Hyderabad,Secunderabad, Warangal and Khammam. This Commit-tee was authorised to frame a constitution which wasadopted on the 27th of April 1924 at Hyderabad. The aimsand objects of the Committee were further expanded, andthey were : To establish libraries and reading rooms, tohelp and encourage students, to support scholars, to col-lect manuscripts and to conduct research, to spread knowl-edge through hand-bills, booklets, and public speeches, to


propagate Telugu, to encourage fine arts and physical cul-ture and to help the helpless

Thus, the Andhra Jana Sangh decided to achieveits aim of promoting the social, economic and cultural re-vival of the people of Telangana by adopting measures thatwould bring about a general enlightenment among thepeople. Akin to that some of the books (small booklets)that were published by the Andhra Jana Sangh were NizamAndhra Rashtra Prasamsa, eulogizing the Ancient glory andHistory of Andhras, the Nizam Rashtra Andhras, NizamRashtrapu Ahbivruddi Margamulu, (Ways of Improvement),Mahatarpa – Maggamu Pannu, Vettichakiri, NizamRashtrapu Jana Pariganamu etc. It also brought out smallbooklets entitled: the Vartaka Swatantriyamu (freedom ofthe merchants) to bring about a general awakening amoungthe merchant community (Komatis or the Vaishya) who weregreatly exploited by the State officers and other officialswhile on tour in the districts and villages. To encouragethe efforts of the Andhra Jana Sangh, news Papers likeNilagiri Patrika, Telugu Patrika and ‘Golkonda Patrika alsocame on to the scene. Due to the encouragement it gave toTelugu scholars and historians, a conference was also heldon the ‘History of Kakatiyas’ at Warangal in 1930 and ajournal entitled the Kakatiya Sanchika containing valuableresearch articles on the history of the Telugu people wasbrought out.

On account of the encouragement they receivedfrom the Andhra Jana Sangh, the merchants in Telanganaformed an association known as the Merchants Associationto protest against the exploitation by the bureaucracy andthereby indirectly joined hands with the Andhra Jana Sanghin its fight against the autocracy of the Government. Further,the Andhra Jana Sangh also carried on a campaign againstVetti Chakiri and for the emancipation of the Balutadars.On account of this the Nizam’s Government issued aFirman in 1923 forbidding the employment of Balutadarsby the people in general.

The Library movement started by the AndhraJana Sangh spread rapidly and its first conference was heldin Madhira in 1925. Seeing the popularity of the move-ment the Government at first attempted to close down thelibraries on the pretext that the prior permission of theconcerned district officers was not obtained for startingthe libraries. In 1927, they also tried to prevent the con-vening of the Suryapet Andhra Jana Sangh Conferencealong with the Second Library Conference saying that thepermission of the Executive Council had to be obtainedfor these conferences. The Reception Committee of theSuryapet Jana Sangh had to file an appeal to the court toget the permission for the conference.

The Andhra Jana Sangh from 1928 onwards tookup the cause of women’s education. Due to its efforts theAndhra Balika High School was founded in 1928 and thefirst batch of girls studying in the Telugu medium weremade to appear at the Matriculation examination 1934. Inthe beginning the Osmania University refused to recognisethe Andhra Balika High School on the plea that thoughthe policy of the Osmania University was to encourage thepursuit of education in the mother tongue, it consideredonly Urdu as mother tongue. However, Maharshi Karvecame to the rescue of the Andhra Jana Sangh and the firstbatch of girl students in the Telugu medium appeared fortheir examination in the Karve institute.

Attempts of the Sangham to establish schools invillages were also confronted with similar difficulties. Dur-ing one year, nearly four thousand schools opened by theSangham were to be closed. So, the organisers of theSangham had to concentrate their attention on properlyconducting the schools that existed already. Even with sucha strain, the workers of the Sangham continued their ef-forts to create awakening in the Telangana region. TwelveTelugu booklets written in easy simple style intelligible toan ordinary villager priced at one anna each were placedwithin the reach of all. The Andhra Jana Kendra Sanghamnever enjoyed the goodwill of the Government which re-peatedly denied permission for holding purely educationaland library meetings and conferences. In the initial stages,the Sangham did not have any political bias but the repres-sive policy of the Government generated a spirit of resis-tance among them. The Andhra Mahasabha had begun asan organization of moderate Telugu nationalism. Thoughit had right from the beginning taken up proposals for eco-nomic and social reforms, it was far from demanding anoverall restructuring of the existing order.

Margrit Pernau’s book refers to the AndhraMahasabha as an organization of Moderate Telugu Nation-alism. Though it had from the beginning taken up propos-als for economic and social reforms, it was far from de-manding an overall restructuring of the existing order.

Andhra Mahasabha Conferences:

The year 1930 brought in a great upsurge through-out India. As a consequence of this the first AndhraMahasabha Conference took place on 3, 4 and 5th March1930 at Jogipet in Medak district, under the presidentshipof Suravaram Pratapa Reddy, a popular writer, poet andeditor of ‘Golkonda Pathrika’. The movement started bythe Andhra Jana Sangh spread rapidly gaining its strengthday by day. In this conference, the Andhra Jana Sangh con-verted itself into the Andhra Mahasabha. Nawab Ali Yavar


Jung, Secretary for Constitutional Affairs, asking Dr.Ramakrishna Rao, “Why the name Andhra Maha Sabha?.When it could as well be called the Telangana Maha Sabha”.The Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen party which was formed in 1927also warned the Nizam’s Government that the AndhraMahasabha was hood-winking the Government by itsapprently modest demeanour while in fact heading a subtleand dangerous movement in the State. Seeing the activitiesof the Telugu people under the aegis of the AndhraMahasabha, the Maharashtrians and the Kannadigars alsofounded the Maharashtra Parishad and the KarnatakParishad in 1937. The nationalist members of the AndhraMahasabh conference held their thirteenth session(last) atKandi village in Medak district under Jamalapuram KeshavaRao in May 1946. On the whole, the Andhra Mahasabhaorganised 13th sessions in 17 years

Andhra Mahila Mahasabha Conferences:

One of the special features of the first AndhraMahasabha was that a Women’s Conference called theAndhra Mahila Mahasabha Conference was held alongwith the Andhra Mahasabha from 1930 onwards at vari-ous places and discussed socio and cultural aspects ofwomen. This feature of holding the Andhra Mahila SabhaConference side by side with the Andhra Maha Sabha con-ference was continued up to the year 1942, when, duringthe 9th Conference at Dharmavaram, the women membersfelt strong and confident enough to have their own sepa-rate conference.

The conference was keenly conscious of the ne-cessity of rewriting the history of Telangana and the peoplein general were requested to give every possible help toresearchers when they approached them.

Elimination of Urdu as the medium of instruc-tion for Hindu girls was very strongly recommended. Peoplewere also anxious to see that Government encouraged tech-nological and agricultural education among the masses.

The resolution was adopted unanimously that thelibrary moverment as it was prevalent in a State like Barodashould be introduced in the whole State so that the miser-able percentage of literacy would be enhanced.

A resolution of the previous session was reiteratedaccording to which people were requested to collect manu-scripts and other materials in the form of pieces of art forrewriting the history of the country,

Thus, Rise of Telugu Consciousness has paved wayfor the National Movement in the Hyderabad State liber-ated the people from the autocratic rule of the Nizam, af-ter a great struggle.

References:1. Anney, M.S., The Hyderabad Administration, the

Sarvadeshik Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Delhi, 1938.

2. Hanumantha Rao, Madapati Telangana Andhrodhyamamu(Part-I & II (Telugu), Sri Vani Mudranalayam, Sultanbazar,Hyderabad-Deccan, 1949

3. Hanumantha Rao, Madapati Telangana Andhrodhyamamu(Part-I & II) (Telugu) (edited) by M.L.Narasimha Rao,Telugu Vishwa Vidyalayam, Public Gardens, Hyderabad,1995

4. Khan, Mohd.Abdul Waheed, Brief History of AndhraPradesh, Hyderabad, 1972.

5. Kishan Rao, V., Swami Ramananda Tirtha and theHyderabad Freedom Struggle, Sri Sai Publishers, Warangal,1988.

6. Kondavalli Venkata Seshagiri Rao & Heeralal Moriya,Hyderabad Samsthanamlo Rajakeeyavikasam - AndhraMaha Sabhaadhyakshulu (Telugu), Kodad, 1985

7. Margrit Pernau, The Passing of Patrimonialism; Politics andPolitical Culture in Hyderabad,1911-1948, Manoher Pub-lishers and Distributors, New Delhi, 2000

8. Manikya Rao, Veldurthi ‘Hyderabad SwathanthrodhyamaCharithra (Telugu), Published by SwathanthrodhyamaCharithra, Gandhibhavan, Hyderabad, 1992

9. Narasimha Rao, M.L, Hyderabad Swanthanthrodyamamu,(Telugu), Sri Sai Publications, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad,1998

10. Narayan Reddy, Ravi, ‘Heroic Telangana Reminiscenses andExperiences’, New Delhi, 1973

11. Pratap Reddy, Suravaram, Andhrula Sanghika Charitra,(Telugu), Andhra Saraswatha Parishad, Hyderabad, 1950.

12. Ramchander Rao Mandumula, ‘TelanganaAndhraodyamam’, Swatantra, Vol.No.IV, 1956

13. Sarojini Regani, ‘The Movement for the Social and Cul-tural Revival of Telangana in the Erstwhile Hyderabad, SomeAspects of Deccan History, 1975.

14. Shatajayanthi Utsava Samithi, 22-3-1985, Andhra PitamahaMadapati Hanumantha Rao Jeevitha Charithra,Ramalingam, D’s article on ‘Andhrodhyama Nirmata’

15. Swami Ramananda Tirtha, ‘Memoirs of Hyderabad Free-dom Struggle, Popular Prakshan, Bombay, 1967.

16. Syed Dawood Ashraf, Dr; The Seventh Nizam ofHyderabad, An Achival Appraisal, Moazam Hussain Foun-dation, Hyderabad, 2002

17. The Freedom Struggle in Hyderabad, Relevant Volumes,Hyderabad, 1956

18. Vaikuntham, Y., ‘Public Awakening in the Nizam’s Domin-ion in the second half of the 19th Century, Ithihas, Journalof the State Archives, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, Vol.VI,July-December 1978

*****


* Asst. Professor, Dept. of History, Kakatiya University, Warangal.

ã=∂[OÖ’x H˘xfl =~åæÅ „Ñ[Å∞ «=∞ rq`åx Hõ=ã~°"≥∞ÿ#

Hõhã „áê äŒq∞Hõ ™œHõ~åºÅ#∞ (J=ã~åÅ#∞) ‰õÄ_® f~°∞ÛHÀÖËx ã≤÷ux

¿Ñ ŒiHõO JO\Ï~°∞. ¿Ñ ŒiHõO QÆ∞iOz =ÚYºOQÍ Ô~O_»∞ ~°HÍÅ

ÉèÏ=#Å∞ L<åfl~Ú. XHõ\˜ ™ê¿ÑHõ∆ ¿Ñ ŒiHõO (Relative Poverty),

Ô~O_Àk x~°¿ÑHõ∆ ¿Ñ ŒiHõO (Absolute Poverty).1 Õâ◊OÖ’x qaè#fl

=~åæÅ „Ñ¨[Å P^•Ü«∂xfl QÍx, qxÜ≥∂QÆ =ºÜ«∂xfl QÍx áÈeÛ,

«‰õΩ¯= P^•Ü«∂xfl á⁄O Œ∞ «∞#fl ÖË • «‰õΩ¯= qxÜ≥∂QÆ =ºÜ«∞O

KÕã¨∞Î#fl "åix ¿Ñ Œ"å~°∞QÍ ÖˇH˜ ™êÎ~°∞. D q èŒ"≥∞ÿ# ¿Ñ ŒiHÍxfl

™ê¿ÑHõ∆ ¿Ñ ŒiHõO JO\Ï~°∞.

^Õâ◊OÖ’x „Ñ¨[Å Hõhã¨ J=ã¨~åÅ Ñï=∂ÏÅ#∞

=ÚO Œ∞QÍ x~°‚~ÚOz# «~åfi « =∂Ô~¯\ò èŒ~°Å P è•~°O`À "å\˜

qÅ∞=#∞ JOK«<å"Õã≤ Hõhã r=<å=ã~° qxÜ≥∂QÍxfl x~åúi™êÎ~°∞.

D Hõhã r=<å è•~° qxÜ≥∂QÆ=ºÜ«∞ ™ê÷~Úx •i„ Œº~Y JO\Ï~°∞.

D q èŒ"≥∞ÿ# Hõhã¨ J=ã¨~° =ºÜ«∂xfl ‰õÄ_» KÕÜ«∞ÖËx ã≤÷ux x~°¿ÑHõ∆

¿Ñ ŒiHõO JO\Ï~°∞. ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊OÖ’x ¿Ñ ŒiHõO x~°¿ÑHõ∆ ¿Ñ ŒiHõO.

™ê¿ÑHõ∆ ¿Ñ^ŒiHõ ÉèÏ=# ãÖÑ¨#fl ^ÕâßÅÖ’ LÑ¨Ü≥∂y™êÎ~°∞.

ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊OÖ’ ¿Ñ ŒÅ ãOYº#∞ •i„ Œº~Y P è•~°OQÍ x~°‚~Ú™êÎ~°∞.

XHõ =∞x+≤ =∞#∞QÆ_»‰õΩ J=ã¨~°"≥∞ÿ# PÇ¨~°Ñ¨Ù ÔHÖ’sÅ =∂Ô~¯\ò

„^Œ=º qÅ∞= P^è•~°OQÍ qxÜ≥∂QÆ^•~°∞x `«Åãï =ºÜ«∂xfl

x~°‚~Ú™êÎ~°∞. W Õ •i„ Œº~Y (Poverty Line). Z=i P^•Ü«∞™ê÷~Ú

D Ñï=∂O Hõ#fl «‰õΩ¯=QÍ =ÙO@∞O^À "åix ^•i„ Œºˆ~Y‰õΩ

kQÆ∞=# =Ù#fl@∞¡ ÑïQÆ˜™êÎ~°∞.

D "åºãOÖ’ P èŒ∞xHõÜ«ÚQÆOÖ’ ¿Ñ ŒiHõO Ü≥∞_»Å „ÑÉèí∞`åfiÅ∞

=º=ÇÏiOz# f~°∞ K«iÛOK«|_ç#k.

„a\˜+¨µ áêÅ#‰õΩ Ñ¨Ó~°fiO ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊ PiúHõ ã≤÷u JÑ¨Ê\˜

„Ñ¨ÑÖK« ã≤÷uÖ’ „Ñ¨=ÚY ™ê÷#OÖ’ =ÙO_ç#k. Ñ¨Ó~°fi HÍÅÑ¨Ù ÉèÏ~° «

ãÖÑ¨ Œ#∞ QÆ∂iÛ W «~° Õâ◊"åã¨∞Å∞ Hõ äŒÅ∞QÍ „"åâß~°∞. WÖÏO\˜

"åxÖ’ H˘xfl Juâ◊Ü≥∂‰õΩÎÅ∞, =º`åº™êÅ∞ LO\ÏÜ«∞#∞‰õΩ<åfl XHõ

ãÖQÆu QÆ=∞xOK«=K«∞Û. 17, 18= â◊`å|ÌOÖ’ ÉèÏ~°`«^Õâ◊OÖ’

ãÖKå~°O KÕã≤# "å~°∞ <Õ\˜ Œ∞ã≤÷uH˜ U=∂„ «O ãÖ|O èŒO ÖËx

„QÍ=∞ ™œÉèÏQÍºxfl Ñ¨^ÕÑ¨^Õ K≥|∞`«∂ =KåÛ~°∞. 17= â◊`åaÌÖ’

ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊OÖ’ «# Ü«∂„ «#∞ QÆ∞iOz ~åã∂Î \Ï=sfl~ü WÖÏ J<åfl_»∞

''=∞s z#fl ÑÖ¡Ö’ ‰õÄ_® aÜ«∞ºO, Ñ≤O_ç, "≥#fl, z‰õΩ¯_»∞ "≥Ú ŒÅ~Ú#

¿Ñ^ŒiHõO – „Ñ¨Éèí∞`åfiÅ∞, <å_»∞, <Õ_»∞– _®II Ñ≤. ã¨ •#O ŒO*

HÍÜ«∞QÆ∂~°Å∞, K«ÔH¯~°, ~°Hõ~°HÍÖˇ·# q∞~îå~ÚÅ∞ HÍ=Åã≤#xfl

^˘~°‰õΩ`å~Ú——.2

"≥hflã¨∞ „áêO`åxH˜ K≥Ok# =∞<Àp 17= â◊ å|ÌOÖ’

B~°OQÆ*Ë|∞‰õΩ „Ñ¨^è•# "≥·^Œ∞º_»∞QÍ Ñ¨xKÕâß_»∞. PÜ«∞# `«#

'ã¨‡ $`«∞Å—Ö’ ÉèÏ~°`«^Õâ◊ ™œÉèÏQÍxfl ~å¢ëêìÅ"åsQÍ =i‚OKå_»∞.

JO Œ∞Ö’ ÉˇOQÍÅ∞ fã¨∞HÀ=K«∞Û.

''"≥ÚQÆÖò ~å*ÏºÅxflO\ Ö’#∂ ÉOQÍÖò#∞ QÆ∂iÛ „á¶ê<£ûÖ’

ÉÏQÍ ≥Å∞ã∞ JHõ _ç #∞O_ç =ã∞Î=ÙÅ∞ Ü« ~ÀÑÙ‰õΩ ã~°Ñ¶~å HÍ=_»O,

ÉˇOQÍÖò ã¨=∞$kúH˜ x^Œ~°≈#O. DlÑ¨ÙìHõO>Ë ÉˇOQÍÖò ^ÕxÖ’#∂

fã≤áÈ^Œh, ÃÑ·QÍ ã≤Öò¯, #∂Å∞ |@ìÅ∞, K«ÔH¯~°, he=∞O^Œ∞

"≥Ú ŒÅQÆ∞"åxÖ’ ^•xx q∞OK«∞ «∞O Œh =∞#O K≥Ñ¨Ê=K«∞Û. WHõ _»

Ñ¨à◊√§, Ñ¨Ñ¨C è•<åºÅ∞, è•<åºÅ∞, =∞le<£Å∞ [Å`å~°∞ Ñ¨@∞ì|@ìÅ∞

"≥Ú ŒÖ·# Jxfl =ã¨∞Î=ÙÅ∂ J «ºkèHõOQÍ L<åfl~Ú——.3

JÖÏQ „ÃÑ¶Oz Ü«∂„u‰õΩ_»∞ Ésfl 1660 ãOIIÖ’ Ô~O_»∞™ê~°∞¡

ÉˇOQÍÖò "≥àÏ§_»∞. "≥ÚQÆÖò ™ê„=∂[ºO Ñ¨ «<åxH˜ =ÚO Œ∞ `å#∞

K«∂z# ãÖQÆ «∞Å∞ „"åâß_»∞. ÉˇOQÍÖò #∞O_ç P<å_»∞ ZQÆ∞=∞ «=Ù

«∞#fl =ã¨∞Î=ÙÅ∞, [O «∞ãÖÑ¨ Œ, <ÒHÍÜ«∂<åxH˜ ÑÖ@ á⁄ÖÏÅ‰õΩ

ZO`À „â◊q∞Oz U<å_À QÆOQÆ #∞O_ç „ «qfi# KåÖÏ HÍÅ∞=Å∞

~å*ò=∞Ç¨ÏÖò #∞O_ç ã¨=Ú„ ŒO =~°‰õÄ L#fl=x Éˇsfl q=iOKå_»∞.4

~å|~°∞ì ÔH¡Â"£ ÉOQÍÖò ÑÓ~°fi ~å[ è•x J~Ú# =Úi¬ •ÉÏ £‰õΩ

1757Ö’ "≥o§ WÖÏ „"åâß_»∞

''D Ñ¨@ìO "≥·âßÅºOÖ’, [#ãÖYºÖ’, èŒ#OÖ’ ÅO_»<£

Ñ¨@ì=∞O « LOk. HÍx XHõ ÉèË Œ=ÚOk. D Ñ¨@ìOÖ’x =º‰õΩÎÅ∞

ÅO_»<£Ö’x "åiHõ<åfl =∞Ç¨Ï «Î~° ™œÉèÏQÆºO`À «∞Å «∂QÆ∞ «∞<åfl~°∞——5

"åV˝‡Ü«∂^è•~åÅ#∞ |\˜ì, [#â◊√$ux |\˜ì ã¨=∞HÍb#

„ÑÑOK« ™ê÷~Úx |\˜ì ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊O áêi„âßq∞HõOQÍ J «∞º#fl « ã≤÷uÖ’

LO_ç#^Œ#fl q+¨Ü«∞O JO^Œ~°∂ JOwHõiOKå~°∞. WO_çÜ«∞<£

WO_»¢ã≤ìÜ«∞Öò Hõg∞+¨<£ (1916–18) «=∞ x"ÕkHõ#∞ D „HÕk

q^èŒOQÍ „áê~°OaèOKå~°∞. ''P^èŒ∞xHõ áêi„âßq∞Hõ =º=ã¨÷‰õΩ

ÑÙ\˜ìxÅ¡~Ú# Ü« ~ÀÑÙ ÑtÛ=∞ ÉèÏQÆOÖ’ J<åQÆiHõ Pk=∞ *Ï «∞Å∞

x=ã≤ã¨∞Î#fl ~ÀAÖ’¡, ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊O ~åAÅ∞ èŒ<åxH˜, tÅ∞ÊÅ HõàÏ

H“â◊ÖÏºxH˜ „Ñ¨MÏº`«"≥∞ÿ# ™ê÷#O ãÖáêkOzOk. `«~åfi`« KåÖÏ


HÍÖÏxH˜ `˘Å∞`« Ñ¨tÛ=∞ =~°Î‰õΩÅ∞ ÉèÏ~°`«^ÕâßxH˜ =zÛ#Ñ¨C_»∞

‰õÄ_» D Õâ◊ áêi„âßq∞HÍaè=$kú L#fl «™ê÷~ÚÖ’ L#fl U Ü« ~ÀÑÙ

Õâ◊O Hõ<åfl U=∂„ «O «‰õΩ¯= ã≤÷uÖ’ ÖË Œ∞——6

WO_çÜ«∞<£ WO_»¢ã≤ìÜ«∞Öò Hõg∞+<£ (1916–18) J èŒº‰õ∆Ω_»∞

ã¨~ü ä•=∞ãπ Ç¨ÖÏO_»∞ ÉèÏ~° « Ö’Ç¨Ï ãÖÑ¨ Œ q+¨Ü«∞OÖ’ 1908Ö’

WÖÏ „"åâß_»∞.

''WHõ _ç"å~°∞ «Ü«∂~°∞ KÕã≤# W#∞=Ú J «∞º «Î=∞"≥∞ÿ#k.

Ü« ~ÀÑÙÖ’ <Õ_»∞ L «Î=∞"≥∞ÿ# L‰õΩ¯ =ã∞Î=ÙÅ∞ «Ü«∂~°∞ KÕ¿ã Ñ Œú «∞Å∞

JÑ¨Ê\˜H D Õâ◊OÖ’ L<åfl~Ú. HõàÏ=O «=ÚÖ·# =ã¨∞Î ãÖÑüÎx

~åy, HõOK«∞ "≥Ú ŒÖ·# "åx`À «Ü«∂~°∞ KÕ¿ã"å~°∞. g@xflO\˜ =Å¡

ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊O XHõÑ¨C_»∞ Ö’Ç¨Ï „Ñ¨ÑÖK«OÖ’ Ju „áê=ÚYº ™ê÷<åxfl

P„Hõq∞OzOk——7

JÑ¨Ê\ ˜ˆH W#∞=Ú, L‰õΩ¯ L`«ÊuÎ J`«∞º#fl`« ™ê÷~Ú

K≥OkO Œx QÆ∞iÎOK«=K«∞Û#∞. P q+¨Ü«∞OÖ’ P èŒ∞xHõ áêi„âßq∞HÍ

aè=$kúH «y# Ñiã≤÷ «∞Å∞ L<åfl~Ú. D Ñiã≤÷ux „a\+µ áêÅ#Ö’

ZO Œ∞‰õΩ qzÛù#flO KÕâß~À, ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊O ZO Œ∞‰õΩ "≥#∞Hõ|_ç# ã≤÷uH˜

=zÛO^À „a\˜+¨µ áêÅ##∞ Ñïje¿ãÎ J~°÷=∞=Ù «∞Ok.

ÉèÏ~° « Õâßxfl „a\+π"å~°∞ •^•ÑÙ Ô~O_»∞ â◊ åÉÏúÅ HÍÅO

ÑïáêeOKå~°∞. "åi áêÅ# HõO>Ë =ÚO Œ∞ ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊O „Ñ¨ÑÖK«

„Ñ¨MÏºu HÍOz# =ã¨∞Î=ÙÅ#∞ «Ü«∂~°∞KÕã≤ q ÕâßÅ‰õΩ ZQÆ∞=∞u

KÕã¨∂Î Ü« ~ÀÑ≤Ü«∞<£ ÕâßÅ‰õΩ U=∂„ «O fã≤áÈ‰õΩO_® LO_Õk.

Dã¨∞ì WO_çÜ«∂ HõOÃÑh "å~°∞ =∞# ÕâßxH˜ =zÛ# ˘e

~ÀAÅÖ’ =∞# Õâ◊OÖ’ «Ü«∂Ô~·# =ã∞Î=ÙÅ<Õ Ü« ~ÀÑ≤Ü«∞<£ ÕâßÅ‰õΩ

fã≤‰õΩ"≥o§ J"Õ∞‡"å~°∞. HÍh „Ñü‰õÄÅ"≥∞ÿ# „Ñ¨Éèí∞ «fi q è•#O =Å¡,

„a@<£Ö’ ãÖÉèíqOz# áêi„âßq∞Hõ qÑ¡=O =Å¡ q Õj =ã¨∞Î=ÙÅ`À

áÈ\©Ñ¨_»ÖËHõ =∞# Õâ◊OÖ’x ‰õΩ\©~° Ñï„â◊=∞Å∞ „Hõ=∞OQÍ H©∆Õz

áÈ=@O [iyOk. ^•x`À D Ñï„â◊=∞ÅÃÑ· P è•~°Ñ¨_ç# "å~°∞

QÆ «ºO «~°O ÖËHõ =º=™êÜ«∞~°OQÍxH˜ «~°eáÈ=@O`À, JÑ¨Ê\˜H

JkèHõ [<åÉèÏ L#fl =º=™êÜ«∞~°OQÆOÃÑ· P è•~°Ñ_»@O`À x~°∞^ÀºQÆO

ÃÑiyOk.

ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊O #∞Oz ™ê èŒº"≥∞ÿ#O « Z‰õΩ¯= ~å|_ç á⁄O Œ_»"Õ∞

„a\˜+π "åi „Ñ¨ è•# èÕºÜ«∞OQÍ LO_Õk. "åi ~å|_çÖ’ Z‰õΩ¯=

ÉèÏQÍxfl ã¨=∞‰õÄiÛÃÑ>Ëì Éèí∂q∞tã¨∞Î#∞ ã≤÷~°OQÍ Z‰õΩ¯= "≥Ú «ÎOÖ’

á⁄O^Œ_®xH˜ âßâ◊fi`« tã¨∞Î Ñ¨^Œúu (Permanent Settlement)

1793Ö’ ÉˇOQÍÖòÖ’ „Ñ¨"Õâ◊ÃÑ@ì_»O [iyOk. `«~°∞"å`« nxx

=∞iH˘xfl „áêO`åÅ‰õΩ qãÎiOÑ*Ëâß~°∞. Ô~· «∞Å‰õΩ, ÑÓ~°fi [g∞O^•~°∞Å‰õΩ

Éèí∂q∞ÃÑ· Pã≤ÎÇ¨Ï‰õΩ¯ ÅaèOzOk. H˘ «ÎQÍ U~°Ê_ç# D [g∞O^•s

=~°æO KÕ «∞ÅÖ’ Éèí∂q∞ Z‰õΩ¯=QÍ ˆHO„nHõ$ «"≥∞ÿ LO_Õk. „a\˜+π

áêÅ#‰õΩ g~°∞ XHõ =ÚYº"≥∞ÿ# J#∞‰õÄÅ =~°æOQÍ LO_Õ"å~°∞. D

[g∞O^•~°∞¡ „Ñ¨Éèí∞`åfixH˜ K≥e¡OK«_»O HÀãÖ, «=∞ ÖÏÉèíO HÀãÖ

Ô~·`«∞Å#∞Oz Z‰õΩ¯= "≥Ú`«ÎOÖ’ H“Å∞ =ã¨∂Å∞ KÕ¿ã"å~°∞. "Õˆ~

J=HÍâßÅ∞ ÖËHõ Ô~· «∞Å∞ QÆ «ºO «~°O ÖËx Ñiã≤÷ «∞ÅÖ’ Z‰õΩ¯= Ñ#∞fl

K≥e¡ã¨∂Î ¿ã^ŒºO KÕã¨∂Î r=#O QÆ_ç¿Ñ"å~°∞. =º=™êÜ«∞ L`«ÊuÎ

ÃÑOK«_»O HÀãÖ U"≥∞ÿ<å K«~°ºÅ∞ fã¨∞HÀ"åÅ<åfl "åi ŒQÆæ~° Pi÷Hõ

™ÈÎ=∞`« LO_Õk HÍ^Œ∞. [g∞O^•~°∞¡ ‰õÄ_® =º=™êÜ«∞ L`«ÊuÎ

ÃÑOK«_»O HÀãÖQÍh, Éèí∂q∞x Jaè=$kúÑ¨~°K«_»O HÀãÖQÍh „â◊ Œú

K«∂¿Ñ"å~°∞ HÍ Œ∞. J~Ú Õ Ô~· «∞Å‰õΩ, „Ñ¨Éèí∞`åfixH˜ „Ñ¨ «ºHõ∆ ãÖ|O èŒ

=Ú#fl Ô~· «∞"ås Ñ¨ Œúu KåÖÏ „áêO`åÅÖ’ J=∞Å∞Ö’ L#flÑ¨Ê\˜H©

JHõ _» ‰õÄ_® Ô~· «∞Å Ñiã≤÷u Œ∞~°ƒù~°OQÍ<Õ LO_Õk. „ÑÉèí∞ «fiO Z‰õΩ¯=

"≥Ú «ÎOÖ’ Ô~· «∞Å #∞O_ç tã¨∞Î =ã¨∂Å∞ KÕÜ«∞@"Õ∞HÍHõ, Ô~· «∞Å Pi÷Hõ

Ñïã≤÷ux "≥∞~°∞QÆ∞Ñ¨~°K«@O HÀãÖ U q èŒ"≥∞ÿ# K«~°ºÅ∞ fã¨∞HÀHõ

áÈ=_»O =Å¡ Ô~· «∞Å Pi÷Hõ Ñïã≤÷u H©∆Õz «=∞ P^•Ü«∂Å#∞Oz

á⁄ Œ∞Ñ¨Ù KÕã≤ ÃÑ@∞ì|_ç ÃÑ\ì =º=™êÜ«∞ L «Ê «∞ÎÅ#∞ ÃÑOK«QÆeˆQ

Ñïã≤÷uÖ’ LO_Õ"å~°∞ HÍ Œ∞. KåÖÏ=∞Ok z#fl Ô~· «∞Å∞ «=∞ Pi÷Hõ

Œ∞ã≤÷u =Å¡ =º=™êÜ«∞O KÕÜ«∞ÖËHõ Éèí∂=ÚÅ#∞ J=Ú‡H˘x =º=™êÜ«∞

‰õÄbÅ∞QÍ =∂~å~°∞. Ñ¶e «OQÍ ¿Ñ ŒiHõOÖ’H˜ <≥@ì|_®¤~°∞.

ÕâßxH˜, f„= ^•i„ ŒºO ^•Ñ¨ÙiOK«@O ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊OÖ’

„a\+π ÑiáêÅ# XHõ „Ñ è•# HÍ~°O. HÍÅO QÆ_çz#H˘nÌ, „Ñ[Å‰õΩ

„| «∞‰õΩ ≥~°∞=Ù ^˘~°Hõ@O Œ∞~°¡Éèí"≥∞ÿáÈ~ÚOk. „a\˜+π Pi÷Hõ ÀÑ≤_ç

ÕjÜ«∞ Ñï„â◊=∞Å Ñ¨ «#O, "å\˜™ê÷<Õ P èŒ∞xHõ Ñï„â◊=∞Å∞, «Å‰õΩ

q∞Oz# Ñ¨#∞flÅ |~°∞=Ù, ÉèÏ~°`« ãÖÑ¨^Œ „a@<£‰õΩ Ñ¨Ü«∞#O,

=º=™êÜ«∞ ãÎ|ú «‰õΩ ^•i fã≤# "≥#∞Hõ|_ç# =º=™ê~ÚHõ =º=ã÷,

Ô~· åOQÍxfl Àz"Õ¿ã [g∞O^•~°∞¡, Éèí∂HÍ=∞O Œ∞Å∞, „ÑÉèí∞=ÙÅ∞, =_ô¤

"åºáê~°ã¨∞ÎÅ∞, =~°Î‰õΩÅ∞, „Ñ¨Éèí∞ «fiO Õâ◊ ^•i„^•ºxH˜ HÍ~°ÏÅ∞.

19= â◊`åaÌ Ô~O_»= áê^ŒOÖ’ ÉèÏ~°`«^Õâ◊OÖ’x Jxfl

„áêO`åÅÖ’ q[$OaèOz# Hõ~°∞=Ù HÍ@HÍÅÖ’ „Ñ¨[Å ^•i„ ŒºO

Ñ~åHÍ+ì‰õΩ KÕiOk. D Hõ~°∞=Ù HÍ@HÍÅ∞ "≥Ú@ì"≥Ú Œ@ 1860–61Ö’

L «Î~°„Ñ Õâò ÑtÛ=∞ „áêO «OÖ’ K≥Å~y Ô~O_»∞ ÅHõ∆Å xO_»∞ „áêÏefl

|eQ˘<åfl~Ú. 1865–66Ö’ Xi™êû, cÇ¨~ü, =∞„^•ãπ, ~å¢ëêìÖ’¡

Hõ~°∞=Ù =zÛOk. ~°=∂~°q∞ 20 ÅHõ∆Å =∞Ok K«xáÈÜ«∂~°∞. XHõ

Xi™êûÖ’<Õ Ñ¨k ÅHõ ∆Å =∞Ok =∞~°ÕKå~°∞. 1868–70

ãÖ= «û~åÅ =∞ èŒº L «Î~°„Ñ¨ Õâò, ÉÁOÉÏ~Ú, ÑÖ*Ï|∞ ~å¢ëêìÅÖ’

ãÖÉèíqOz# ^•~°∞ H∆Í=∞OÖ’ 14 ÅHõ∆Å =∞OkH˜ ÃÑ·QÍ „áêÏÅ∞

q_çKå~°∞. ~å[Ñ¨Ù~îå<åÖ’ J<ÕHõ ãÖ™ê÷<åÖ’¡ #∂\˜H˜ 30 =∞OkH˜

ÃÑ·QÍ Hõ~°∞=Ù =Å¡ =∞~°ÕKå~°∞.

1876–78Ö’ =∞„^•ã¨∞, "≥∞ ÿã¨∂~°∞, ÃÇ·Ï^Œ~åÉÏ^£,

=∞Ç~åR, L «Î~°„Ñ Õâò ÑtÛ=∞ „áêO «O, ÑO*ÏÉòÅÖ’ ãOÉèíqOz#


Hõ~°∞=Ù ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊OÖ’ JÑÊ\=~°‰õΩ ãOÉèíqOz# Hõ~°∞=ÙÖ’¡ J «ºO «

ÉèíÜ«∞OHõ~°"≥∞ÿOk. =∞Ç¨~åRÖ’ 8 ÅHõ∆Å =∞Ok, =∞„^•ã¨∞ ~åROÖ’

35 ÅHõ∆Å =∞Ok, "≥∞ÿã¨∂~°∞ [<åÉèÏÖ’ S Œ= =O «∞, L «Î~°„Ñ¨ ÕâòÖ’

12 ÅHõ∆Å =∞Ok =∞~°ÕKå~°∞. 1896–97Ö’ XHõ ™êi, uiy

1899–1900Ö’ =∞~˘Hõ™êi ^Œ∞iƒùHõ ∆ Ñïã≤÷`«∞Å∞ P=iOz

Õâ◊"åºÑÎOQÍ Hõ~°∞=Ù ãOÉèíqOzOk. 1896–97 Hõ~°∞=ÙÖ’ ˘q∞‡k

HÀ@¡ 50 ÅHõ∆Å =∞Ok „Ñ¨[ÅÃÑ· Hõ~°∞=Ù „Ñ¨ÉèÏ=O Ñ¨_çOk. 45

ÅHõ∆Å =∞Ok =∞~°ÕKå~°∞. "≥O@<Õ =∞m§ 1899Ö’ Hõ~°∞=Ù =Å#

ÅHõ∆ÖÏk [#O #+ìáÈÜ«∂~°∞. Hõ~°∞=Ù x"å~° K«~°ºÅ •fi~å „Ñ¨[Å

„áêÏÅ∞ HÍáê_®¤xH˜ „Ñ¨Éèí∞ «fiO Ñ¨Ó#∞‰õΩ<åfl ã¨∞=∂~°∞ 25 ÅHõ∆Å

=∞Ok K«xáÈÜ«∂~°∞. D ÃÑ^ŒÌ Hõ~°∞=ÙÖÁHõ¯>Ë HÍ‰õΩO_® J<ÕHõ

„áêO`åÖ’¡ ™ê÷xHõOQÍ Hõ~°∞=Ù HÍ@HÍÅ∞, PÇ¨~° H˘~° « =ÔQ·~åÅ∞

U~°Ê_ç<å~Ú. 1854–1901 ãO= «û~åÅ =∞ èŒº ãOÉèíqOz# Hõ~°∞=Ù

HÍ@HÍÖ’¡ "≥Ú «ÎO 2 HÀ@¡ 88 ÅHõ∆Å, 25 "ÕÅ =∞Ok „Ñ¨[Å∞

=∞~°Õz#@∞¡ qeÜ«∞O _çwƒ J<Õ „a\˜+π ~°K«~Ú « ÖˇHõ QÆ\Ïì_»∞.

1943Ö’ ãÖÉèíqOz# ÉˇOQÍÖò Hõ~°∞=ÙÖ’ 30 ÅHõ∆Å =∞Ok

=∞~°ÕKå~°∞.8

19= â◊ å|ÌOÖ’ ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊OÖ’ `åO_»qOKÕ ÉèíÜ«∞OHõ~°

^•i„ Œº ãfi~°∂áêxfl WHõ _» ÑxKÕ¿ã WOw¡+µ JkèHÍ~°¡Ö’ KåÖÏ=∞Ok

QÆ∞iÎOKå~°∞. L^•Ç¨Ï~°‰õΩ, QÆ=~°fl~°∞–[#~°Öò ã¨ÅÇ¨=∞O_»e

ã¨Éèí∞º_≥·# Kå~ü¡û WeÜ«∞\ò WÖÏ "åºMÏºxOKå_»∞ :

''=º=™êÜ«∞O g∞^Œ rqOKÕ „Ñ¨[Ö’¡ ã¨QÆO =∞Ok U_®k

"≥Ú «ÎOÖ’ Hõ_»∞ÑÙ xO_® Éè’[#O JO>Ë Uq∞\’ Z~°QÆ~°x K≥ÑÊ_®xH

<Õ#∞ "≥#∞HÍ_»#∞——.9

WOÑ‘iÜ«∞Öò QÆ*ˇ\ò ãÖHõÅ#Hõ~°Î qeÜ«∞O Ç¨ÏO@~ü –

''ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊ [<åÉèÏÖ’ <åÅ∞QÆ∞ HÀ@¡ =∞OkH˜ J~åúHõe`À „| «∞‰õΩ

"≥à◊§|∞K«Û@O JÅ"å@——x XÑ¨C‰õΩ<åfl_»∞.10 D Ñïã≤÷u 20=

â◊ å|ÌOÖ’ WOHÍ kQÆ*ÏiáÈ~ÚOk. 1911 #∞Oz 1941 =~°‰õΩ

[iy# 30 Uà◊§ HÍÅOÖ’ ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊OÖ’x =∞x+≤H ÅaèOKÕ PÇ~°O

29 âß «O «yæáÈ~ÚOk.

ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊ Pi÷Hõ ≥·#º ã≤÷ux, c Œ «<åxfl ≥e¿Ñ QÆ∞~°∞ÎÅ∞

WOHÍ KåÖÏ L<åfl~Ú. 1925–1934 ãÖ= «û~åÅ =∞ èŒºHÍÅOÖ’

„Ñ¨ÑÖK«OÖ’ÔHÖÏ¡ Ju «‰õΩ¯= «Åãï P^•Ü«∞O HõÅ ÕâßÅ∞ K≥·<å,

WO_çÜ«∂Åx *ÏfÜ«∂^•Ü«∞ âß¢ã‘ÎÜ«∞ ÑïjÅ#Ö’ HÀe<£ HÍ¡~ü

`ÕÖÏÛ_»∞. WOw¡+¨µ"åx P^•Ü«∞O ÉèÏ~°fÜ«Úx P^•Ü«∞O Hõ<åfl

J~Ú Œ∞ Ô~@∞¡ Z‰õΩ¯=. J\Ï¡Q, 1930 „áêO «OÖ’ ÉèÏ~°fÜ«Úx

ã¨QÆ@∞ „Ñ¨=∂O 32 Uà◊√§! P èŒ∞xHõ "≥· Œº âß¢™êÎÅ∞, áêiâ◊√ ŒúºO

J Œ∞ƒù « „Ñ¨QÆu ™êkèOz ‰õÄ_® WHõ _» =∞x+≤ ã¨QÆ@∞ PÜ«Ú~åÌÜ«∞O

JO`Õ. KåÖÏ Ñ¨tÛ=∞ Ü«¸~°Ñπ ^ÕâßÖ’¡#∞, L`«Î~° J"≥∞iHÍ

~å¢ëêìÖ’¡#∂ =∞x+≤ ã¨QÆ@∞ J"≥∞iHÍ ~å¢ëêìÖ’¡#∂ =∞x+≤ ã¨QÆ@∞

PÜ«Ú~åÌÜ«∞O 60 Uà◊√§.

ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊ ^•i„ ŒºO, "≥#∞HõÉÏ@∞ «#O „Ñ¨Hõ$u =#~°∞Å

Ö’ÑO =Å¡ U~°Ê_ç#q HÍ=Ù. Jq =∂#= HõeÊ`åÅ∞. ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊OÖ’

„Ñ¨Hõ$u =#~°∞Å∞ Jáê~°O. ã¨kfixÜ≥∂QÆ Ñ¨~°∞Û‰õΩO>Ë „Ñ¨[Å‰õΩ

J «∞º#fl « ã¨∞YãÖÑ¨ ŒÅ∞ ã¨=∞‰õÄiÛ ÃÑ>Ëì@O « â◊HÎ=O «"≥∞ÿ#q.

HÍx, q Õâ◊ ÑïáêÅ# Ñ¶e «OQÍ, ^ÀÑ≤_ô Ñ¶e «OQÍ, "≥#∞Hõ|_»¤

"åº=™ê~ÚHõ, áêi„âßq∞Hõ Pi÷Hõ x~å‡O Ñ¶e «OQÍ ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊O

¿Ñ^Œ „Ñ¨[Å∞ rqOKÕ ãÖÑ¨#fl ^Õâ◊=∞~ÚOk. Wk q_»∂¤~°"≥∞ÿ#

"åãÎ=O.

¿Ñ ŒiHõ x~°∂‡Å#‰õΩ K«~°ºÅ∞ :

™êfi`«O„`åº#O`«~°O ÉèÏ~°`«^Õâ◊ „Ñ¨Éè í∞`«fiO ¿Ñ^ŒiHõ

x~°∂‡Å#‰õΩ „Ñ¨Ü«∞ «flO KÕã≤Ok. 1960–70 Œâß|ÌOÖ’ [iy#

ÑïjÅ#Å∞ „Ñ¨Éèí∞ «fiO Œ$+≤ìx ¿Ñ ŒiHõO "≥·Ñ¨Ù =∞o¡OKå~Ú. J~Ú^À

„Ñ¨ÏoHõ ~°∂á⁄OkOKÕ ãÖ Œ~°ƒùOÖ’ ¿Ñ ŒiHõ x~°∂‡Å#‰õΩ f„=Hõ$+≤

KÕÜ«∂Å<Õk „Ñ¨^è•# JOâ◊OQÍ QÆ∞iÎOK«_»O [iyOk.

<å<å\˜H˜ ÃÑiyáÈ`«∞#fl ¿Ñ^ŒiHÍxfl x"åiOK«_®xH˜,

¿Ñ Œ"åi r=#„Ñ¨=∂Ïxfl ÃÑOK«\ÏxH˜ „Ñ¨Éèí∞ «fiO 1970 «~°∞"å «

H˘xfl L^ÀºQÆ Ñ¨ äŒHÍÅ∞ „Ñ¨"Õâ◊ÃÑ@ì_»O [iyOk. JO Œ∞Ö’ „QÍg∞

Ñ¨#∞Å HÍ~°º„Hõ=∞O, (Rural Works Programme) z#fl Ô~· «∞Å

Jaè=$kú U[hû (Small Farmers Development Agency),

LáêO « Ô~· «∞Å, =º=™êÜ«∞ ‰õÄbÅ Jaè=$kú U[hû (Marginal

Formers and Agricultural Labour Agency), =~å¬ÉèÏ=

„Ñ¨ÉèÏq`« „áêO`åÅ HÍ~°º„Hõ=∞O (Drought Prone Area

Programme), ÑxH PÇ~° Ñ äŒHõO (Food For Work Scheme),

L^ÀºQÆ Ç¨g∞ Ñ¨ äŒHõO (Employment Guarantee Scheme)

"≥Ú ŒÖ·# Ñ¨ äŒHÍÅ#∞ „Ñ¨"Õâ◊ÃÑ\ì L^ÀºQÆ J=HÍâßÅ∞ HõeÊOK«_»O

^•fi~å P^•Ü«∂Å∞, L «ÊuÎ ÃÑOz ¿Ñ ŒiHÍxfl x~°∂‡eOK«=K«Ûx

„Ñ¨Éèí∞`«fiO xâ◊Û~ÚOzOk. D Ñ¨^äŒHÍÅ#∞ "Õ~°∞"Õ~°∞ U[hûÅ∞

x~°fiÇ≤ÏOK«_»O =Å¡ ãOÑÓ~°‚"≥∞ÿ# Ñ¶e`åÅ∞ ÅaèOK«Hõ XHõ ãOÑ¶∞\˜ «

HÍ~°º„Hõ=∞O ~°∂á⁄OkOz P~À „Ñ¨ÏoHõÖ’ ^Õâ◊=∞O`«\Ï

=iÎOÑ¨*ËÜ«∞@O [iyOk. P Ñ¨ äŒHõO IRDP Ñ¨ äŒHõO (Integrated

Rural Development Programme).

ã¨=∞„QÆ „QÍg∞Ïaè=$kú Ñ¨ äŒHõO :

„QÍg∞ „Ñ¨[Å r=#Ñïã≤÷ «∞Å∞ "≥∞~°∞QÆ∞Ñ¨~°K«_»O HÀãÖ

1980 JHÀì|~°∞ 2= Õn# D Ñ¨ äŒHÍxfl „Ñ¨"Õâ◊ÃÑ@ì_»O [iyOk.

D Ñ¨ äŒHõO =Å¡ ¿Ñ ŒiHõ x~°∂‡Å#‰õΩ „Ñ¨ «ºHõ∆ K«~°ºÅ∞ fã¨∞HÀ=_®xH˜

J=HÍâ◊O U~°Ê_çOk. D Ñ¨ äŒHõO ^•fi~å 1985–86Ö’ 30.61


ÅHõ∆Å =∞Ok 1986–87Ö’ 37.47 ÅHõ∆Å =∞Ok ÅaÌá⁄O^•~°∞.

1991–92 ãO= «û~°OÖ’ 25.17 ÅHõ∆Å ¿Ñ Œ „QÍg∞ ‰õΩ@∞OÉÏÅ∞

ÅaÌá⁄O^•~°∞.

*ÏfÜ«∞ „QÍg∞ L^Àºy`å Ñ¨ äŒHõO :

D Ñ¨ äŒHÍxfl JHÀì|~°∞ 2, 1980Ö’ Ñ¨xH˜ PÇ¨~°Ñ¨ äŒHõO

™ê÷#OÖ’ U~åÊ@∞ KÕÜ«∞@O [iyOk. D Ñ¨ äŒHõO HÀãÖ P~À

„Ñ¨ÏoHõÖ’ 1843.76 HÀ@∞¡ Y~°∞ÛKÕã≤ 1774.37 q∞eÜ«∞#¡

Ñ¨xk<åÅ L^ÀºQÆ HõÅÊ# [iyOk. U_À ÑÖK«=~°¬ „Ñ¨ÏoHõÖ’

D Ñ¨^äŒHõO „HÕ^Œ 1445 q∞eÜ«∞#∞¡ Ñ¨xk<åÅ∞ HõeÊOKåÅx

ÅHõ∆ ºOHÍQÍ 1986–87 <å\˜H˜ 395.23 q∞eÜ«∞#¡ Ñ¨xk<åÅ∞,

1987–88 <å\˜H˜ 370.77 q∞eÜ«∞#∞¡, 1988–89 <å\˜H˜

394.96 q∞eÜ«∞#¡ Ñxk<åÅ‰õΩ ãiÑ_» Ñx HõeÊOK«_»O [iyOk.

Éèí∂q∞ÖËx „QÍg∞ „Ñ¨[Å Láêkè Éèí„ Œ å Ñ¨ äŒHõO :

„QÍg∞ „áêO`åÅÖ’x Éèí∂q∞ÖËx „Ñü ‰õΩ@∞O|OÖ’ XHõ

=ºHÎH˜ ãÖ= «û~°OÖ’ 100 ~ÀAÅ∞ Ñ¨x HõeÊOK«_®xH˜ 1983Ö’

D Ñ¨^äŒHõO „áê~°OaèOKå~°∞. D Ñ¨^äŒHõO ¿Ñ^ŒiHõOÖ’ L#fl

x~°∞^ÀºQÆÅ‰õΩ Z‰õΩ¯=QÍ LÑ¨Ü≥∂QÆÑ¨_çOk. HO„ Œ„Ñ¨Éèí∞ «fiO "≥Ú Œ\˜

™êiQÍ 500 HÀ@¡ ~°∂áêÜ«∞Å∞ D Ñ¨ äŒHÍxH˜ H\Ï~ÚOzOk. D

Ñ¨ äŒHõO ^•fi~å P~À „Ñ¨ÏoHõ z=i Ô~O_»∞ ãÖ= «û~åÅÖ’ Hõeã≤

260.18 Ñ¨x k<åÅ Ñ¨x HõeÊOK«_»O [iyOk. 7= „Ñ¨ÏoHÍ

HÍÅO „áê~°OÉèí ãÖ= «û~°O 1985–86 ãÖ= «û~°OÖ’ 247.58

q∞eÜ«∞#∞¡ Ñ¨xk<åÅ∞ HõeÊOK«QÍ 1988–89 ãÖ=`«û~°OÖ’

296.56 q∞eÜ«∞#¡ Ñ¨x k<åÅ∞ HõeÊOK«_»O [iyOk.

[=Ç¨Ï~ü ~À*òQÍ~ü Ü≥∂[# :

„QÍg∞ „áêO`åÅÖ’ •i„ Œº~Y‰õΩ kQÆ∞=# L#fl 4 HÀ@¡

40 ÅHõ∆Å ‰õΩ@∞OÉÏÖ’¡ XH˘¯Hõ ‰õΩ@∞O|OÖ’ XHõ iÔH·<å 50 #∞Oz

100 ~ÀAÅ∞ Ñ¨x HõeÊOK«\ÏxH˜ 1989Ö’ „Ñ¨"Õâ◊ÃÑ\Ïì~°∞. D

Ñ äŒHõO •fi~å 1989–90Ö’ 8643.87 ÅHõ∆Å Ñxk<åÅ∞ HõeÊOK«QÍ

1990–91 <å\ ˜H ˜ 8745.59 Ñ¨xk<åÅ∞, 1991–92

ãÖ= «û~°OÖ’ 8081 ÅHõ∆Å Ñ¨xk<åÅ∞ HõeÊOK«_»O [iyOk.

ÉèÏ~° « „Ñ¨Éèí∞ «fiO ¿Ñ ŒiHõ x~°∂‡Å#‰õΩ H˘xfl n~°…HÍeHõ

K«~°ºÅ∞ ‰õÄ_® KÕÑ¨\ìOk. JO Œ∞Ö’ =ÚYºOQÍ Éèí∂ãÖã¨ ~°Å∞,

„QÍg∞ Ñi„âßg∞Hõ~°, x~°Hõ∆~åãº « x~°∂‡Å#, [<åÉèÏ xÜ«∞O„ «

=ÚYº"≥∞ÿ#q. D q èŒ"≥∞ÿ# K«~°ºÅ∞ J<ÕHõO fã¨∞HÀ=@O ^•fi~å

¿Ñ ŒiHÍxfl x"åiOK«=K«∞Û. H˘ «Î Ñ¨ äŒHÍÅ∞ „Ñ¨"Õâ◊ÃÑ@ì_»O Hõ<åfl

L#fl Ñ¨^ä ŒHÍÅ J=∞Å∞ ã¨„H õ=∞OQÍ H˘#™êy¿ãÎ ¿Ñ^ŒiHÍxfl

x~°∂‡eOK«=K«∞Û.

References :

1. Ram Ahuja, Social Problems in India, New Delhi, 1997 p.

47; C.N. Shankar Rao, Sociology-Primary Principles, New

Delhi, 2001. p. 582

2. \Ï=ifl~ü, ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊ ãÖKå~°O, P‰õΩûÑ¶~°∞¤ Ü« x=iû\© „ÃÑãπ,

1925, Vol. I, p. 238

3. ~°[h áêq∞ Œ ü, <Õ\˜ ÉèÏ~° « Õâ◊O, q[Ü«∞"å_», 1947, p. 41

4. Ibid

5. ~°[h áêq∞ Œ ü, Op.cit. p. 40

6. ~°[h áêq∞ Œ ü, Op.cit. p. 42

7. Ibid

8. aÑ≤<£K«O„ Œ, P èŒ∞xHõ ÉèÏ~° « K«i„ «, ÃÇ·Ï Œ~åÉÏ £, 1988 p.

224

9. Ibid

10. Ibid

****