Chapter- Ill

Land Tenure System and Socio-economic Condition of the

Peasantry

Why do we need to study the colonial land tenure system?

One reason which stands out, above aJJ others, is that it is essential

for an understanding of the various interests and rights over land

and its linkage with the socio-economic status of the agrfu-ian

community. Land Revenue was one of the traditional mainstays of

British Indian Finance. 1 The land revenue administration and rent

structure was deeply linked with the tenurial rights and the

intermediate interest groups. The traditional tenurial expression of

property rights was one of the factors in differentiation of socio-

economic status of the owner cultivator and the farmer. 2 This

chapter examines the characteristics of the land tenure system, the

relationship between the proprietary class and the peasantry vis-a-

vis the colonial state in coastal Orissa and its inter linkage with the

socio-economic condition of the agrarian population.

Agriculture was the main stay of colonial economy in India.

State ownership of land was a decisive factor that influenced

1 Dietmar Rothermund, The Great Depression and British Financial policy in India, 1929-34', IESHR, vol.l8, No.1, Jan-March 1981, p. 2.

2 Eric Stokes, 'Dynamism and Enervation in North Indian Agriculture: The Historical Dimension', in David Ludden (ed.), Agricultural Production and Indian History, Oxf~rd University Press, Delhi, 1994, p.SO. In North Indian context, Stokes says that the British classification of tenures was "crude and inconsistent and rarely did tenures confirm to their ideal types". This is tru-e in cas~ of Orissa.

152

both colonial agrarian relations and the entire economic structure.

The transitional character of rural economy had been subject to

economic and political influence. 3 Hence, British rule in India

brought a lot of changes in the agrarian relations that varied from

place to place. Like elsewhere in India, Orissa had different kinds of

tenurial holdings having marked differences within a specific area

which this chapter discusses in detail.

Although the modern sense of social justice demands that

there should be no concentration of land in the hands of a few,

there was, however, no ceiling on land holdings until post

independence Land Reforms Legislation. 4 Control over land was

diffused from the traditional tenure holders like the warriors,

priests, and moneylenders to members of the cultivating and

herding communities after independence. While the seeds of change

in land tenure were sown prior to independence, especially after the

passing of the Orissa Tenancy Act, 1913, real change occurred only

after independence. While land reforms legislation after

independence caused much land to pass to the tillers who did not

have control over land under the colonial state, the previous

titleholders (under the British Government) retained a large share of

their land. Such titleholders who resided in the village could not

3E. Lipson, The Economic History of England, A & C Black Ltd., London 1931, p.371.

1-Before British rule, there were also no ceilings on land holdings. See Gove.:nment of Orissa, Report on Land Reforms Committee, 1958, Revenue Departrnent, C:1ttack, 1958, p.13.

153

make much use of the vast land they possessed as they were not

able to cultivate their land profitably, therefore, they had to sell

there holdings to the agriculturists who made the best use of the

land.5

(I) The Colonial Land tenure System in Orissa:

With the passing of the Regulating Act of 1784 by the British

Parliament and coming of Lord Cornwallis as the Governor General

of India in 1786 there was a change in the revenue policy of the

East India Company. According to the provisions of the 1784 Act

Cornwallis advocated a simple and uniform revenue system which

would free both the zamindars and the raiyats from any

harassment due to frequent increase in demands of land revenue.

Keeping this purpose in view, permanent settlement of land revenue

based on a fair and reasonable assessment was considered to be

the best for the payment of which . the hereditary tenure holders

were given the responsibility.6

In the initial years of their rule in Orissa i.e. from 1803-1837

the series of temporary survey and settlement operations carried

out by the East India Company suggests that the Company

administration was anxious to check the alienation of land and to

check the alienation's already made. This was so because their

policy was to resume the assessment of rent-free lands as already

5This happened in an all India basis after independence. See R. Thomas Rosin, ,-:.and Reforms and Agrarian Change: Study uf a Ma1War Village from Raj to Swaraj, l<awat Publications, Jaipur, 198?, p.lO~-.

C>Ibid., pp. 2-3.

154

alienated on religious or social ground as far as possible, which

they were sure, would give them a higher source of income. 7 Orissa

at the time of British occupation consisted of certain tributa.Iy

states, permanently settled estates, flat rice growing country called

the Mughalbandi (which was mainly the area of temporary

settlement operations) and a swampy coastline. 8 At the beginning,

the Company administration did not attempt to introduce

permanent settlement or its laws in Orissa. There were a few Quilas

or chief estates and a few fiscal officers who had retained such . a

hold over the whole of the Pargana, which the East India Company

acknowledged as proprietors and gave them the benefit of

permanent revenue. There were also a certain number of Kanungo

I

estates and estates of other chiefs and grantees. 9 Of these some

were regarded as greater estates, and others were allowed to be

independent and were treated as proprietors. 10 A large number of

proprietors who were recognised as landlords were the headman,

7See B. Chaudhuxy's article on 'Agrarian Relations: Eastern India', in Dhannakumar, (Ed). The Cambridge Economic History of India, vol. 2, C. 1757 -C 1970, Cambridge University Press, 1982, Reprint, Hyderabad, 1984, p.89.

8 B.H. Baden Powell, The Land System of British India, vol. 1, Oriental publishers (Indian reprint), Delhi, 1974, p. 568. The proclamation of 1803 issued on the annexation of Orissa spoke of zamindars, which generally meant landholders. Baden-Powell says there was no zamindars in Orissa in Bengal sense. See pp. 568-569.

9 See Letter No. 477, dated 31 August, 1875, froin John Beams, Collector of Cuttack, to the Commissioner of Orissa Division on Land Tenures of Cuttack District in Report on Land Tenures in Orissa, Board of Revenue, Orissa, Cuttack. pp. 2-10.

1° See letter no. 916A, dated 23 September 1875, from T.E. Revenshaw, Commissioner of Orissa Division, to the Secretary to the Government of Bengal, Financial Department (Statistics) in Report on the Land Tenures in Orissa, ( 1875) a;>. cit.

155

Muqaddams or Sarbarakars of villages or Pradhans. These

categories of landlords survived under the colonial government. 11

There was many complicity and diversity in the land tenure

system in Orissa that existed prior to the British rule. 12 While

recognising the old titles of tenure holders the British tried to

reduce the number and variety of such tenurial rights that were

classified under the following nine broad categories. 13

1. Proprietors of estates who were directly responsible to the

state for the revenue of the land they owned i.e. Malguzars or

zamindars. 2. The tenure holders with quasi-proprietary rights,

holding under the proprietors, viz. Muqaddams, Padhans and

Sabarahkars. 3. The revenue free proprietors, holding the lands free

of revenue in perpetuity i.e. lakhiraj bahaldars. 4. Holders of

resumed revenue free tenures or bajiaftidars. 5. Purchaser of waste

lands, (either reclaimed or settled) or Kharidadars. 6. Resident

cultivators whose right to hold at a rent fixed for the term of the

settlement which were recognised i.e. thani and Chandina raiyats. 7.

Cultivators without such recognised right i.e. Pahi (occupancy or

non-occupancy) raiyats. 8. Persons holding land free of rent in lieu

11 The proclamation of 1803 issued on the annexation of Orissa spoke of zamindars, which generally meant landholders. Baden-Powell says there was no zamindars in Orissa in Bengal sense. See B.H. Baden Powell, op. cit., pp. 568-569.

12S.L. Maddox, Final Report on the Survey and Settlement ofthe Province of Orissa (Temporarily settled areas) 1890-1900 AD, vol. 1, Calcutta, 1900, p. 198. For district wise· breakup of the tenure holders in the districts of Cuttack, Balasore, and Purl, see Ibid., vol. II, Appendix HA, HB & HC.

I3S.L. Maddox, op. cit. \'01 .1, p.l70.

156

of the services to an individual or to the community i.e. jagirdars,

and 9. The under tenants.

(i) Zamindari Tenure:

The British Government conferred on the Zamindars of Orissa

right to inherit and transfer by sale or gift or otherwise of the whole

or part of their estate. They were accorded with right to collect rent

from the raiyats, right over fisheries, forests and wastelands. They

were also given the right to grant lease and to create sub-ordinate

tenure. Each zamindar had to pay a fixed amount of revenue which

was fiXed either permanently or for certain period depending upon ,

the estate which was permanent or temporarily settled. In case the

zamindar failed to pay the fiXed revenue to the government, his

estate was liable to be sold by public auction. The proprietary share

of the rent paid to this category of landholders varied from 30 to 50

percent of the gross rental in the Hustabodh village and 7.5 to 20

percent in the intermediary tenure village.l4

Stringent sale laws like sunset law was first introduced by the

government to ensure steady collection of revenue. The sale law to a

certain extent encouraged the zamindars for extorting money from

the tenantry by illegal ways. 15 Some of these illegal exactions were

routine zamindari collections (called magan), collections for

marriage expenses of zamindar wards, on special festive occasions

14 S.L. Maddox, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 178-181.

15 Government of Orissa, Report on the Survey, Settlement and Maintenance of wn.l Records, 1938, p.5.

157

etc. 16 The details of these illegal exactions are discussed separately

in this chapter. There were many instances of default by zamindars

in making the payment of revenue to the government treaswy. This

was especially so during the late colonial period in districts where

leniency in the Sale Law was shown. The colonial government

always instructed to tighten up the implementation of the Sale

Law.I7

There were many big estates, which were acquired by

speculators at the revenue sales at Fort William in the earlier

decades of British rule in Orissa. 18 These landholders were mostly

absentees living in Bengal, who rarely visited their estates in Orissa

and left the management of their estates with their local agents who

were sometimes unscrupulous and corrupt. 19

(ii) Padhani Tenure:

From ancient times village heads were responsible for the

collection of revenue from the villages who were called Padhan. He

was appointed by the villagers with the consent of the Raja. After

Mughal conquest of Orissa, most of them were transferred to

Muqaddam and acquired quasi-proprieta.Iy status. The British

Government conferred them the status of sub-proprietary tenure

t6 Government of Orissa, Report on the Land Revenue Administration, 1937-38,pp. 8-9.

11 Ibid, 1938-39, p. 3.

tBAs a result of the sale laws in Orissa 51.6 percent of the 3000 proprietors' of the first settlement of 1804 were wiped out between 1804 and 1818. See B. Chaudhuri, ( 1982) op. cit. p. 96.

19 Cu.ttack District Oazetteer, Patna, 1931, p. 190.

158

holders having more or less same rights as that of the Muqaddams.

The claims of the Padhans to be regarded as proprietaly tenure

holders were fully aclmowledged at the settlement of 1837.20

(iii) Muqaddami Tenure:

The word Muqaddam was coined by the Muslim rulers to

designate the Padhans who were entrusted with the work of

collecting revenue. Accordingly, the tenure was coined Muqaddami

and the tenure holder became a Muqaddam. This tenure was

created as a matter of favour to a person or by the sale of a portion

by talookdar. Most of the Muqaddums became zamindars of their

estates under the East India Company. Those, landholders who

could not produce any documentary proof of their existence

remained as tenure-holder and subordinate to the zamindars, but

retained their earlier Muqaddam title. They, however, enjoyed same

rights and privileges and exercised same functions as the

zamindars did in their villages. The Muqaddams were allowed to

collect rent from the raiyats of their villages and · received an

allowance of 20 to 25 percent of the gross rental of the village. They

were liable to pay a definite and flXed annual sum of money to the

zamindars. In case of default the tenure was to be sold by public

auction. 21

2o Puri District Gazetteer, P&tna, 1929,. p. 238.

~- 1 See Ihid. K.C. Mishra, op. cit., p. 111.

159

(iv) Tankidars:

The tankidars were descendants of certain persons mostly

Brahmins to whom grants of land were made by former Rajas.

Originally there were grants assigned for the support of idols,

priests, courtiers, members of the royal household and others who

had claims to be supported from the public property. Numerous

alienation of this nature was made not only by Rajas of Khurda in

Purl district but also in other areas and also by their

representatives and by landholders of all descriptions. These grants

were originally made rent-free and were only assessed to rent when,

after the British occupation, the Rajas found the revenues reduced.

At the time of British conquest the tankidars were found paying quit

rents for their holdings generally amounting to a few annas per

acre. Under the Cuttack land revenue regulations of 1805, the

tankidars right to continue to hold their lands for even on quit rents

was declared valid. In subsequent settlements these tankidars were

placed under the proprietor of the neighbouring estates and paid

their rent or revenue through them, while the proprietor was

allowed ten percent discount for expenses of cultivation. Under the

Orissa Tenancy Act, 1913 the tankidars were classed as sub­

proprietors. But their private land was not given any protection

against raiyati rights as the case of other sub-proprietors. The sub­

proprietary status accorded to the Tankidars, however, did not give

160

them any privilege.22

(v) Sarbarakari Tenure:

Sarbarahkars were mere servants of the zamindars who

collected rents from the cultivators and enjoyed rents from the

cultivators and in return enjoyed rent-free tenures, called Jagirs.

Some of them possessed land in theii villages as farmers, and had

hereditary right to collect rent from the village land. They were also

granted certain percentage of the total rent of the village and were

recognised by the government as sub-proprietary tenure holders.

Section 65 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, 1885 protected them from

eviction from their tenure for arrears of rent.

(vi) Kharida Tenure:

The word .Kharida means things purchased. During the

Mughal and Maratha rule the talukdars, zamindars and the

Muqaddums exercised their privilege of disposing a small areas of

waste land and jungle by deeds of sale for getting a lumpsum

money to persons who undertook to bring it under cultivation or to

establish villages. These lands were termed as .Kharida. These

.Kharida lands were supposed to be small and less fertile or less

important land, but in many cases fraud was practised and many

valuable lands were alienated as kharida tenure for which the

22For a discussion on the tanki tenures and other tenure holders in Orissa see Rungalall Banetjee, Report on the Land Tenures in Cuttack District (1875); Nandakissore Dass, Puri District Tenure Report (1875); and W. Fiddian, Report on Land Tenures in the District of Balasore (1875), in Report on Land Tenures in Orissa, Board o!: Revenue, Cuaack.

161

transferor made large profits. A peculiarity of the Kharida lands was

that these were, in many cases consisted of scattered patches

spread over the whole district. The lands had as a rule, a small rent

assessed on them, which they continued to pay through the

zamindar of the parent estate. In some cases they were rent-free

and were then called ma.fi Kharida. 23

(vii) Shikmi Zamindars:

Shikmi Zamindari was one of the subordinate proprietary

tenures, which were divided into three categories. The first and the

most common case was that of resumed service tenures such as the

dograi Mahals and resumed Jagir Villages, where one or two of the

Jagiradars were permitted to engage for the payment of the revenue,

the others being recorded as Shikmi Zamindars paying through the

recorded malguzar who got ten percent for collection expenses. In

the second category were the lands, which were assigned by a

malguzar for the support of his new relatives. The relative who was

not allowed to engage separately was called as Shikmi Zamindar

and received whole of the malikana allowance. The third category is

that in which the alienation of one or two villages of an estate were

made prior to the settlement of 1837 when the purchaser was

seconded as Shikmi Zamindar getting a whole allowance instead of

being a co-sharer.

:::.~ See Ibid. K.C. Mishra, op.cit., p. J J l.

162

(viii) Purushethis:

The word Purushethi meant the headman of a Patna or a

village community. Purushethis were not a common class of

proprietors. They were appointed by the founder of the Patna to

collect the rents, supervise cultivation and settle raiyats in the

village. He was entitled for lands at low rates and a part of the profit

on the collections.

(i.x) Bajyaftidars or Resumed Lakhiraj Tenures:

Baiyaftidars were descendants of those persons who were

holding land free of revenue, or at low rate, at the time of the British

conquest and whose title to hold on such terms was declared

invalid by the regulations of 1805, 1819 and 1825. All persons

darning to hold land on privileged terms were invited to make the

claims in the office of the collector and such claims were

investigated during the settlement of 1837. Those tenurial grants

that were held to be valid under the terms of the Regulation of 1805

were confirmed as revenue free while the others were resumed as

bajyafti tenures. In order to reconcile them to the sudden changes

the Company government allowed some concessional assessment

i.e. those who had been holding land for many years were allowed

assessment of rent at half rates, while others were assessed

nominally to full rates, which were however, comparatively low.

These rates were continued till the 1897 settlement, after which the

government tried to change the haJf rates into full rates. How~ver,

163

the government was not very strict to this change and in fact the

rents of all bajyaftidars and that of the kharidadars still remained

much below the general rent. In the 1927 settlement the leniency of

the government to the category of tenure holders continued. The

rates of rents assessed were limited to two-thirds of the average rate

of raiyati rents in the village. The otlier chief privileges enjoyed by

the tenure holders of these classes were the right to transfer their

tenure without the consent of the landlord. The total area held by

these classes in the Purl sub-division was about 6000 acres and in

Cuttack 108,200 acres and with a rental of Rs. 1-13-0 per acre as

compared with the average raiyati rent of Rs. 3-6-6 per acre in the

1897 settlement.

(x) Jagir Tenures:

The jagir tenures were of two kinds i.e. rent free lands in

return for services rendered to the community and rent free land

holdings for services rendered to the landlord. The jagirs of the

former category, which had its roots in the ancient past, were

neither valued nor assessed for revenue. They were held by

carpenters, barbers, washermen and others who served the village

community in return for the jagir lands and a small annual

payment made by the different families. Prior to 1897 the

Chaukidars used to hold jagirs, but their jagirs were resumed and

assessed to rent and revenue in the settlement of 1897- after which

the chaulddars received a monthly wage. At that settlement the

164

jagirs of Paiks and Khandayats were resumed by agreement and

leniently assessed to rent. The jagirs held by the servants of the

landlord, such as ploughman and labourers formed the second

category of jagir holders. In this case the services were meant for

the landlord. As the jagirs were held in addition to, or in lieu of

wages, which the landlord would have paid, such holdings were,

therefore, valued at the prevalent rate for land and the landlord

paid revenue on the valuation.

(xi) Lakhiraj or Revenue Free Tenures:

All over India it was a long established practice of the native

Rajas to grant revenue free lands for maintenance of Brahmins,

temples, monasteries and to charitable institutions for their

support. Orissa having a large number of temples and Brahmin

populations was not an exception to this system. The feeling of the

native population to such lands was so strong that the

Mohammedan rulers followed the tradition and named these lands

as lakhiraj. 24 The British Government also allowed the system to

continue. The various categories of these lands were brahmottar,

khairat, datta, aima, madad mash, debottar, sadabrati, amroot

manohi and pirrotter. 2s

24 Lakhiraj Lands were those lands for which no rent was paid to the state by the landholder.· The word Lakhiraj is derived from the Persian word La meaning negative and khiraj means revenue.

25 See K.C. Mishra, op. cit. pp. 112-113. S.L. Maddox, op. cit. vol. 1, p. 212.

165

(xii)Other Tenure Holders:

Other tenure holders were those who had taken leases of the

zamindari right, or portions there of either permanently or

temporarily and who enjoyed no special privileges such as the right

of free transfer, and who have not been recognised as a class, as

being entitled to hold at a low rate of rent. The area held by them

were about 22,000 acres in Purl district and 8,100 acres in

Cuttack District and the average rent paid by them was about Rs.

2-5-0 per acre. 26

II. The Landlord and Tenant Relationship:

The relation between the landlords and the tenants in Orissa

were on the whole unsatisfactory. The discontentment among the

two classes became widespread in the 1930s and 1940s. In the

permanently settled areas and in Feudatory States the

discontentment were more troublesome especially in estates like

Sukinda, Madhupur, Kalkala, Pachikote, Balrampur, and Aul in

Cuttack, Balasore portion of Kanika Estate, and parts of Gop,

Balianta and Kakatpur Thanas and Ekrajat estates in Purl. The

tenants complained of illegal exactions, non-grant of rent receipts,

impounding cattle and other harassment. On the other hand the

landlords complained that the tenants were persuaded by some

26See S.L. Maddox, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 172-212, K.C. Mishra, op. cit., pp. 101-114; Government of Bihar and Orissa, First Decennial Review 1912-22, Patna, 1923, pp. 14-3-183; Government of Orissa, Board of Revenue, Land Tenure and Lar.d Peforms in Olissa, 1962, Cuttack 1962; Pl!ri District, Gazetteer, pp. 238-241; Cuttack Di:;trict Gazetteer, pp.;_85-l95.

166

local leaders to withheld rents, damage property and trespass on

land which was not theirs. 27 The government officials expressed

their opinion to administer strict and impartial justice between the

two partners in the land.28 Did the government take any step for

improving the relationship between the landlord and the tenants?

Towards the later part of the coloniai rule, the government felt it

necessazy to administer strict and impartial justice between the

landlords and tenants.29 This change in policy in agrarian relations

took place after the passing of the Orissa Tenancy (Amendment)

Act, 1938 brought by the first Congress Ministry in Orissa. 30 But

prior to this such concern of the government for harmonising the

relationship between the landlord and the tenants was rare.

ILLEGAL EXACTIONS:

One of the causes of the unsatisfactory relation between

landlords and tenants was the illegal exaction of money or goods or

services from the tenants. 31 There were many instances of demand

of free agricultural labour from the tenants by the proprietors and

the sub-proprietazy landholders during the colonial rule. For

example in Nawapara sub-division some gountias and malguzars

27 Samaj, 21 May 1938.

2s Report on the Land Revenue Administration in Orissa, 1938-39, p. 8.

29 Ibid.

30 See Chapter V for a discussion on the Orissa Tenancy Amendment Act, 1938.

31 In this context Partha Chatterjee points out "These illegal exactions of various sorts were really means adopted by landlords to appropriate a larger share of the surplus, means preferable to a straight enhancement of rent which was more difficult to impose and sustain. See Partha Chatte1jee, Bengal, 1920-194 7:111£ Land Questivn, volume one, K.P.Bagchi, Calcutta, 1984, p.18.

167

exacted free agricultural labour from the tenants. They were,

however, warned by the sub-divisional officer against such illegal

demands. With the formation of a separate province of Orissa and

with the progress of the nationalist movement under the Congress

and various peasant organisations there developed awareness

among the tenants regarding their rights. There were attempts to

unite the tenants against such exactions. 32 The official report of the

government confmned about the practice of such illegal exactions

by the proprietary holders and their agents such as Sunia bheti,

Baha Kharcha (marriage fees), magan, piada miadi, bisodhani, salami

and najrana etc. But many tenant victims of such illegal exaction

did not muster courage to take the matter to courts, as they were

afraid that the zamindars or their agents might retaliate in various

ways. 33 In Sambalpur zamindars realised dues at Dasahara, Pousa-

Pumima and Rakshi Pumima from the thikadars working under

them. The thikadars used to give cesses or gifts to the zamindar as

a mark of respect which was also locally called as tika. As a return

gift the zamindars presented dhoti or cash to each thikadar. 34 In

Purl a complaint was flled in the court of the rent suit officer by a

32See D.N. Dhanagre, Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1983, p. 139, 166, 174. The peasant organizations played an important role in mobilisation of the peasantry to voice their pretest against illegal exaction, betfti, forest policy etc. and urged for the abolition of zamindari system. However, the peasant movement gained momentum in mid 1930s. Chapter VI discusses the strategy of the peasant organisations and their movement ..

33Report on Land Revenue Administration in Orissa, 1937-38, pp. 8-9.

"1Ibid.

168

tenant that the Tahasildar of a landlord in the Satyabadi police

station had realised kharadapani from him along with the rent. The

government made enquiries about the complaint and found the

allegation true having substantial evidence and the landlord and

the tahasildar were punished by imposition of fmes.35 However,

many such cases might have remained unnoticed or could not be

proved due to lack of evidence which would have attracted similar

punishment. But mere imposition of fmes was not adequate as the

landlord could manage to recover the fined amount again by some

other illegal ways. It may, therefore, be argued that an exemplruy

punishment would have defmitely discouraged such practices in

other areas.

The practice of extorting money from tenants by way of illegal

exactions particularly presents paid in token of respect to the

zamindars on the occasion of his visits to the estate and on the

occasion of the marriage of his children continued to exist in Orissa

during the colonial rule. Though the growing political consciousness

among the peasantry reduced the instances of such illegal exaction,

it could not stop the practice and the system continued to prevail to

the detriment of the peasantry.36 The practice was widespread in

larger estates and in permanently settled estates and the feudatory

states of Orissa. The tenants were mostly reluctant to complain in

35 Jbid., p. 9.

Jti Kru::ohak, 30 April 1938, pp. 4-8.

169

open court against zamindars in fear of their retaliation. 37 The

collecting agents were also in some cases suspected to have realised

bisodhani or fees for granting fmal acquittance receipt and for issue

of each receipt. With the strengthening of the national movement

and the emergence of the Kisan Sabha the tenants gradually

realised their rights and developed courage to resent and protest

the illegal exactions and to demand for their just rights. 38 Thus, it

may be observed that the zamindars levied abwabs on special

occasions upon the thikadars. The thikadars also paid these

abwabs and gifts to the zamindars. From where the thikadar

managed to pay the illegal demands? Obviously the pressure fell

upon the tenantry which the thikadar extracted in the name of the

zamindars.

Friction between the Raja of Kanika and a section of his

tenants in Balasore district was reported from time to time. 39 In

1937-38 a number of criminal cases were instituted against the

tenants resulting from the excessive zeal on the part of estate

officials in impounding the cattle of some tenants and a too rigid

interpretation on the part of the -proprietor of his right on anabadi

lands. This necessitated the starting of proceedings under section

107 of the criminal procedure code by the district authorities. In

Dhamnagar, in Balasore district, the zamindar Brundaban Chandra

37 Ibid.

38 See Chapter VI.

39 See Asha, 11 Febm21Y 1924.

170

Harichandan Rai Mohapatra had friction with his tenants. In Purl

strained feeling grew in the Khandait tenure of Malipara owing to

the reservation of a portion of forest and owing to the levy of

mutation fee in the Ekhrajat Mahals. 40 There were many such

instances. There were also strained relations between the

zamindars and tenants in permanently settled estates of Sukinda,

Madhupur and Darpan and the temporarily settled estate of

Panchikote in Cuttack district. The cause of tension in Sukinda and

Panchikote was the cutting of valuable trees from jungle without

permission which led to the institution of criminal cases by the

proprietor of Sukinda against the concerned tenants. 4 1

The formation of the Utkal Krushak Sangha and other similar

associations at the village level rapidly developed amongst the

tenants, particularly after 1936, a sense of their rights and a refusal

to submit to customary but illegal exactions. In some cases

landlords retaliated by preventing the tenants access to tanks and

anabadi larids for which feelings between the two classes got

naturally strained. Such a development was inevitable on the wake

of political awakening among the people in mid 1930s. 42 Inspite of

these strained relations the British government did not give any

serious look at the problem. Instead it suggested the peasant

40 Report on Land Revenue Administration in Orissa, 1937-38, pp. 10; Report on Land Revenue Administration in Orissa, 1938-39, pp. 8-10.

~I Ibid., 1937-38, pp. 9-10.

42 Sf:e Kru.sha!c, 28 MAY 1938, P. 10.

!71

associations to work along reasonable lines so that the dissentment

does not spread to other areas leading to a possible agrarian

disturbance.43 While analysing the problem on this aspect the basic

questions that may be raised are did the government show any

sincerity in punishing the culprit landlords as it punished the

erring tenants under the criminal procedure code? Was it not the

duty of a responsible government to protect the tenants from such

economic oppressions like illegal exactions, imposition of cess etc?

This would have defmitely proved helpful to an already suffering

peasantry. Why did the government turned a deaf year to this grave

situation which in a later period accelerated the agrarian tension.

Was there any underlying vested interest of the colonial rulers? Did

it try to encourage such action by the landlords by overlooking the

facts in a bid to strengthen the economy of the landlords who were

their trusted allies in the administration?

The available data suggests that the government was fully

aware about the brewing tension between the landlords, proprietors

and the tenants. It may be argued that the colonial policy not to

dishearten the landlord class by taking stringent measures against

their illegal means of amassing money was because of their fear to

loose the collection of revenue and possible revolt of the proprietary class against the British authorities. Perhaps the experience of

·1.3 Report on Land Revenue Administration in Orissa, 1937-38, p. 10; Report on h.md Revenue Administration in Orissa, 1938-39,'pp. 8-10.

172

1857 was quite firm in their mind.44 It is a fact that the tension

among the proprietaty holders and the tenants was accelerated

when criminal procedure were instituted against them for petty

offences, such as unauthorised cutting of trees in Sukinda,

Madhupur and Darpan. Socialist groups and Krishak Sanghas

encouraged the tenantry to assert their rights on Sarbasadharan

lands, forests, forest produce, trees etc. and to oppose the illegal

exaction of money by the proprietors or landholders. Many peasants

were sent to jail in Nilagiri and Sukinda. They also faced the wrath

of the proprietary class who prevented them from using public

tanks and anabadi lands etc. 45 Although the Orissa Tenancy

Amendment Act, 1938 made provisions against the illegal abwabs

even then there were complaints in many parts of the coastal

districts understudy regarding the practice of such exactions. 46

During the British rule in Onssa how far the landlord acted

as the brain of the agricultural industry. Did they merely waste the

subsistence of others? To what extent they were a burden on the

agrarian community? On the basis of a lot of official and non-official

data it may be stressed that in Orissa the zamindars did but very

44See Ibid., pp. 9-10. Government of Orissa, Home Special Section (T.F. Unit papers N.A.I., Accession No. 640), for British Policy towards the preservation and security of the Zamindars and Talukdars see Government of India, Refonns Office, F. No.13 I 1935 G (A) and K.W.

45Ibid.

16 For details see Repo;t on the Land Revenue Administration of Orissa, 1938-39, p. 8.

173

less for the upliftment of the tenantry. 47 The tenants who should

gain the profits of cultivation remained a theoretical premise in

colonial India. In practice the tenants derived only a partial gain, as

much of the benefits of the rise in the prices of food crops were

absorbed by the intermediate merchants or the moneylenders.

Moreover, the rise in food prices during the First World War did not

last long to give a continued benefit and improve the condition of

the peasantry. The increase of population and their larger

dependence on agriculture adversely affected the peasant

economy48 and they had not such alternative avenues but to live

with minimum subsistence. 49

An ideal landlord should reside in his estate; he should have

professional attitude towards his responsibilities. 50 But in reality

most of the landlords in Orissa may be classed as a socially

parasitic class who merely received their rents, which their agents

collected from their estates. 51 Their initiative in the rural

development work in the estates was questionable. The zamindars

who purchased estates of Orissa at Calcutta taking advantage of

the ·sale law' were mostly absentee landlords. Asha a leading Oriya

47 See H. S. Jevons, The Economic of Tenancy Law and Estate Management, University of Allahabad, 1921,pp. 28, 90.

48 Satya Samachar(OriyaWeekly, Cuttack}, 23 August 1930.

49 See H.S. Jevons, op. cit., pp. 19-22.

50 Ibid.

5 1 Such phenomenon was also prevalent in Bengal. See Partha Chatterjee, op. cit., pp. 200-201.

174

news weekly criticised the absentee zamindars by saying that they

drained the resources of Orissa to fatten Bengal. This phenomena

may be one of the reason why Orissa people did not regret for the

severance of their connection with Bengal Presidency in 1912,52

inspite of pressures from the domiciled and non-domiciled

Bengalees. 53

It is quite well lmown that for a pretty long period the sale of

zamindaries for arrears of government revenue used to be held in

Calcutta and the speculators in Bengal purchased those zamindaris

as the Oriyas could not take advantage of the sale law owing to lack

of good communication facilities in the 19th century. 54 In addition

to this some Oriya young zamindars dissociated from their own

society, language, manners and customs and kept in long exile in

the distant city or away from their (Zamindari) native place. This

was more so in case of young wards of zamindars who were sent to

Calcutta and Madras for higher education. 55 Therefore, all these

landlords did not discharge their professional responsibilities to

their tenants.

52See Asha, 8 March 1915, p.2.

53 See Government of India, Home Department, Political Branch, A Proceedings No. 65, October 1912.

51 Asha, 8 March, 1915, p.2.

55 Sp:~ech of Raja Saheb of Dharakot on 6.4.1914 at the Madras L-~gislative Council, quoted. inAsha, 1915,22 March, p.2.

175

III. Economic Condition of the Peasantry:

The economic life of Indian peoples in general, was

conditioned by geographical, physical and climatic factors on the

one hand and by social organisations, age old customs and

religious faiths on the other. Through the ages the basic, ways of

living were stabilised into flxed economic systems which, more or

less, maintained continuity from ancient to medieval times.

Economic conditions also have presertted certain paradoxical

features at almost all periods of history. India was proverbially a

rich country, full .of resources and wealth, yet famines and

scarcities were not unusual phenomena. Within the vast

dimensions of the land there could be· a surplus of food at one place

and extreme scarcity at another. Such contradictory features were

not unnatural in the days when modern means of transportation

did not exist. The so-called medievalism or traditionalism in Indian

economic ways may be said as due to the time factor itself. The

transition from a medieval to modern economy was a worldwide

phenomenon. Like other countries, Indian economy was also

transformed. The colonial rule in India coincided with the general

world economic transition.

Of the two main branches of Indian economy, i.e., agriculture

and small industry, agriculture played a more vital role, which

employed a greater number of people. Agriculture was the basis of

India's rural economy as alrnost the entire rural populatJon was

176

associated with the land in some way or the other. Certain

geographical and climatic conditions had made India predominantly

an agricultural countiy. From time immemorial the agriculturists

were the backbone of the economic life. Other economic groups like

the weavers, carpenters, blacksmiths, etc. who rendered useful

services to the entire population depended on the agriculture and

possessed agricultural lands of their own. The function of the village

community was so much like an integrated organism that all

varieties of people tended to look at the raiyat as the indispensable

factor of community existence. Thus, agriculture and agriculturists

represented the core of the Indian Economy.

That the Indian people especially the agriculturists were

illiterate and were not open to learning new methods of agriculture

was an impression that the foreigners had formed in their mind.

They believed that the Indian agriculturists blindly followed their

traditional methods of agriculture industiy and business an<! were

averse to new innovations. This feeling was not only common in

India and outside among the foreigners but also among the English

educated Indian elite. 56 Therefore, it may be argued that the so­

called traditional and unscientific attitude of Indian raiyat had little

difference with the progressive scientific English raiyats (atleast

upto the 1920s).

Until 1936, the Oriya speaking population continued to be

56 See a related report in Asha, 1915, 29 March 1915, p.2.

i77

divided under four provinces i.e. Bengal Province, Madras Province,

Central Province and the Province of Bihar and Orissa. There were

no technical schools in Orissa though a few Orissa students

received technical education in agriculture outside Orissa. Under

the four provincial administrations in which Orissa was tagged in

pieces they always ,remained as a minority. The provincial

government showed keen interest to attend frrst the majority

population in those provinces. Therefore, the claim of Oriyas for

scientific and technical education was neglected. 57

The difficulty in promoting technical skill among the Oriyas

was apparent because of absence of any secondary training

institute in Orissa. Though there were a lot of public opinion for

taking steps for providing secondary and technical education in

Orissa yet the government took no such steps until 1936. On the

plight of Oriyas Asha wrote that of all the people inhabiting in India

the Oriyas were the most unfortunate in being compelled to shift for

themselves under four different administrations and having placed

in a minority in all of them. The absence of cohesion between them

had created a spirit of despondency amongst them which led some

to think that they have been feeble and some to think that they

have been sulky. 5s

In any measure of Land Reforms, the concept of personal

57 Speech of Raja of Dharakote at the Madras Legislative Council quoted in Asha 12 April 1915, pA.

sssee Asha., l February 1915, p.2.

178

cultivation was given much importance. The Reform Committees

set up after independence advocated that if agricultural efficiency

had to be increased with a view to stepping up food production the

element of absentee landlordism had to be carefully eliminated.

However during the colonial rule the government did not appear to

be critical of the negative effects of absentee landlordism which was

the root cause of many chaos and confusion in the estates among

the tenantry and the sub-proprietaiy classes.s9

For an understanding of the difficulties of the peasantry it is

essential to investigate the economic and social basis of the

subsistence pattern that the peasantry had adopted in different

situations. The peasants or any group constituting the

organisational basis of a productive farming unit could attain a

degree of economic security only through an integrative pattern of

cultivation and animal husbandry. Much of the crop was valuable

not simply for the grain that were harvested but also for the

abundant fodder or chaff it provided for the year round raising a

livestock. In Orissa, as in elsewhere in India, crops especially paddy

and biri or mung were not only meant for the grains but their dry

leafs or straws served as fodder and also for thatching the roof of

the houses. The bullock required in cultivation for ploughing and

irrigation was an essential increment to the peasant income when

annually bought and resold as a commodity on the livestock

59 Krushak, 30 April1938, pp.l-11.

179

market. Thus cattle raising played an important role in the peasant

economy of Orissa. 6° Cattle fairs were organised weekly in almost

every locality in rural Orissa, for sale and purchase of cattle. 61 The

standard of living of the Oriya agriculturists was very poor in

colonial Orissa. 62 The periodic natural calamities like flood drought

and cyclone that the coastal population of Orissa had been living

with contributed to their poor economic standard.63 Due to lack of

sufficient security or alternative source of income the small

agriculturist rate of survival from the damage caused by the natural

calamities was slow. As H.S. Jevons pointed out in the early

1920's, it was a general economic law that when the standard of

living was low, practically at the subsistence level it was difficult to

raise it, and when it had been raised from this low level it was easily

depressed again by adverse economic forces. 64

The government measures like irrigation, supply or

agricultural technology like improved tools, fertilisers, seeds etc and

agricultural loans were insufficient and did not cater to the

requirements of a large section of the peasantry. Therefore, the

60 Interviews with Abhinab Kumari Bahali, Gelpur, Bhadrak, (December 1998); Balaram Parhi, Dolsahi, Bhadrak, (December 1998); Surendra Nath Jena, Kendrapara,Cuttack,January 1999; Mahendranath, Mohanty, Freedom Fighter, Markona, Balasore (March 1999).

61 For a similar discussion see R. Thomas Rosin, Land Reforms and Agrarian Change: Study of a Marwar Village from Raj to Swaraj, Rawat Publisher, Jaipur, 1989, pp.104-107.

62 Young India (Ahmedabad), 29 December 1927.

63 See Utka'l Dipika, 9 November 1907 and 16 November 1907;Samaj, 27 February 1926 and 3 September 1927.

61 H. S. ,Jevons, op.cit.,, p.9.

180

standard of living could not be raised and their suffering from the

natural calamities continued to put pressure on their economy. 65

The higher density of rural population in coastal Orissa centred on

the more abundant water supply regions like the riverside or canal

irrigated land or where ground water was abundant. 66 The proximity

to water sources helped the peasantiy ·to rely to certain extent upon

a second harvest or on rabi crops. The government gave advances

to cultivators under the land improvement Loans Act XIX of 1893

and Agriculturists loans Act XII of 1894. But the amount of advance

was very less and was disproportionate67 and interest was charged

from the beneficiaries. 68 The loans were also recovered immediately

after the next good harvest, which had a discouraging effect on the

agriculturists. 69 At the time of agricultural distress the government

allowed remission of land revenue but remission on the ground of

fall in prices of food grains and due to economic depression was not

considered. Except during the year of agrarian distress the

government adopted a coercive process for collection of revenue,

which was detrimental to peasant economy especially during the

65 See Letter from Udhab Nanda, and others of village Ghatkari, Pargana Chabiskud, dated 24 October1925, to the Commissioner of Orissa Division in Government of Bihar and Orissa, Revenue Department, Land Revenue Branch, Proceeding Nos. 1-10, June 1926.

66 Cencus of India, 1911, vol. V, Bengal Bihar and Orissa and Sikkim, by L.S.S.O' Malley, Bengal Secretariat Book Depot, 1913, pp. 20-21.

67 See Krushaka Sankhali, (Oriya Magazine), vol. 1., no. 10, Ocotober, 1928, Dagar, (Oriya Magazine) 1 October, 1940

6 8 Report on Land Revenue Administration, 1937-38, p.7.

69 Ibid.

181

fall of prices of agricultural goods. 70 The growth of agricultural

production for export was not truly phenomenal in Orissa.

The opening of roads and communication networks facilitated

production of various export-oriented crops in many colonial

countries and most parts of India. The cotton boom of the 1860's

gave an impetus to public works development in India like

improvement of rail and road links to facilitate production and

export of raw cotton from India to Great Britain. This shows how

public works were linked with commercial activity and commercial

interest of the colonial state. 71 Nevertheless, in the areas where

crops like cotton and jute were cultivated the colonial government

improved the communication infrastructure like construction of

roads, railway lines, navigational routes and other such facilities for

easy transport of these raw materials to the harbours for its onward

transmission to the British home industry. As the Orissan

peasantry did not produce sufficient quantity of these commercial

crops for which the colonial state also did not take much interest to

70 Regarding the debate on remission of revenue when there is a fall in prices and its subsequent rejection by the government see Dietmar Rothermund, op. cit., pp.2-4. The sharp fall in agricultural prices adversely affected the cash incomes of the cultivating classes, particularly occupancy tenants and under­raiyats with small or medium size holdings. These middle peasants were constantly under pressure to past with their land, see D.N. Dhanagare (1983) op.cit, p.160; This was state of chronic depression in agrarian economy, which was inherent in the colonial economic system. Sec. I.C.S.S.R., A Survey of Research in Economics, volume 4, Agriculture, Part II, Allied Publishers, Bombay, 1975, p.12.

71 For a detail discussion on this aspect and the Laissez fair policy see Sabyasachi Bhattacharya, "Laissez fair in India", I.E.S.H.R., vol. II, no. 1, Ja'.luary 1965, pp. 1-19; also see Dietmar Rothermund, 'The Depression and British Financial Policy in India, 1929-34', I.E.S.H.R., vol. 18, no. 1, ,Jan- March, 1981, l-IP· 5-6.

llQ

encourage such crops and for various other reasons Orissa could

not enjoy the improved communication infrastructure for quite a

long time. The late introduction of rail communication in Orissa

may be cited in support of this argument. Therefore, it may be

assumed that had there been such commercial interest in Orissa

the progress of communication would have been brought much

earlier as it had happened in Bengal, Bombay and Madras.

The policy makers in the British Government while

formulating the principles of land revenue assessment in India

made it clear that the revenue should be realised in the form of a

fixed annual payment in cash, the amount of which should be

subject to no alternation during a prescribed term of years. And this

fixed assessment in cash was looked upon as the standard

characteristic of the land revenue system in colonial India. 72 But in

Orissa this standard principle of assessment and realisation of land

revenue was violated by the colonial government. Instances of

raising land taxes and land revenues were often found on the

ground of improved agricultural production either due to good

seasons, or good crops or due to irrigation facilities.

Periodic famines in India had always checked its gro-wth of

population. 73 The failure of monsoon was characterised as an

important and immediate cause of the famine. As most of the

72 See Imperial Gazetteer of India: The Indian Empire, val. IV, Administrative, Chapter VII, p.214, Oxfod, 1909.

73 Sa.maj, 31 M&rch, 1938.

183

agricultural population almost wholly depended on sufficient and

well-distributed rain any shortfall in the normal rainfall proved

disastrous for the cultivating class. Prolongation of the dry season

for a few weeks ·also affected the yield. The negative impact of

famine on a predominantly agricultural economy included the

reduction of human labour due to starvation deaths and cattle

mortality due to shortage of fodder. 74 Temporary emigration of

landless labourers to places outside the province in search of

employment was quite general and more during agrarian distress. 75

There were also migration of aboriginals ( Santals and other tribes)

into the coastal districts from the neighbouring feudatory states.

The tribals being of good physique and hardworking were much

sought after labourers in factories and canal and bridge

construction works. 76

Orissa had no large-scale industries in the colonial period.

There were however many small and cottage industries like shoe

factories, rice, flour and oil mills ice factory, horn work, a glass

factory at Barang (established in 1938), carpentry work, bidi

manufacturing, production of mats, baskets, cane works etc,

production of cocoons, bell metal industry, which were spread all

74 See Leela Visaria and Pravin Visaria, 'Population 1757-1947' in Dharma Kumar (ed.), The Cambridge Economic History of India, op. cit. p. 477.

75 L.S.S. O'Malley, Memorandum on the Material Condition of the People of Bengal and Bihar arid Orissa in the years 1902-03 to 1911-12, Datjeeling, 1912, pp. 4-5; Samaj, 7 August 1926 and 14 August 1926.

76 Report on Land Revenue Administration of Orissa, 1938-39, p.ll.

184

over the three districts. 77 Due to lack of proper marketing

management and improvement in the quality of goods these

industries could not help in raising the overall economic standard

of the non-agriculturists. 78

For rural development the British Government in Orissa

introduced large number of petty schemes, when supervision of the

petty schemes were difficult the government considered the

proposal for introducing costly schemes. 79 The government wanted

the co-operation of the beneficiaries to contribute fmancially to the

project such as village communications water supply etc. and also

to provide assistance of labour. In the opinion of the colonial

authorities public contribution and contribution from the villagers

were essential for carrying out such rural development schemes of

lasting value. However, instances of such pressure upon the

proprietary landholders, which would have set a precedent, was not

found to have suggested by the government. ~ YWhy there was more emigration from Orissa especially of the

wage earners in comparison to the immigration? Was it because of

low wages? What was the reason behind the low wages and was

there any decrease in the demand of wage labourers? As discussed

77 Report on the Land Revenue Administration of Orissa for the year 1918-19, p. 14; Letter dated 14 August1919 from J.A. Sweeney, Secretary to the Revenue Department, in Government of Bihar and Orissa, Revenue Department, Land Revenue Branch, Proceedings No. 5-11, February, 1920.

7s Samaj, 23 January 1926 and 6 February 1926.

79 For details C:i.J. Rural Development Schemes in Orissa See Report on Land Reuenu.e Administration of Orissa 1936-37, and 193'7-38, pp. 14-15.

185

earlier most part of coastal Orissa suffered from natural calamities

like flood, drought, cyclone, epidemic diseases etc. either frequently

or in alternative years. 80 In a predominantly agrarian economy a

bad harvest affected · the subsistence pattern of the depending

population. And when there was a fall in prices of food grains it

further deteriorated the economy of the agrarian population. 81 As a

result, the trading of both agricultural and non-agricultural goods

remained slow. The wages of both skilled and non-skilled labourers,

therefore, could not increase in such periods of economic

depression. The fall of prices reduced the purchasing power of the

agrarian population and it affected the trading of the non-

agricultural goods. And the non-agricultural population who

depended upon the agricultural population for trading of their

goods also suffered economic losses. Therefore, the demand of

labour both by the agriculturists and non-agriculturists also

decreased. In this condition the wages remained low or stagnant.

This atmosphere of depression in rural economy obviously

encouraged emigration. 82 This was in fact a reality in the colonial

coastal Orissa under the period of study especially after the

inauguration of railways in the early twentieth century. Besides the

above reasons there were other factors which encouraged

80 See Report of the Orissa Flood Committee, Superintendent, Govemment Printing, Bihar and Orissa, Patna, 1929, pp. 10-16, 56-59.

81 Samaj, 14·August, 1926.

82 L.S.S.O' Malley, Memorandum on. Material Condition .... op. cit., pp. 4-5; Samaj, 14 August, 1926.

186

emigration i.e. epidemics, loss of cattle wealth due to flood and

diseases etc. and unhygienic atmosphere. Therefore, people from

various parts of Orissa emigrated to Calcutta and Rangoon. These

emigrants were mostly unskilled labourers who went out after the

secession of agricultural operations for seeking employment on a

higher wage. 83

Conclusion:

The preceding survey of the colonial agrarian structure in

Orissa demolishes the colonial legacy of development in India. The

Indian economic problem especially the rural problem has its roots

in the agrarian structure inherited from the past. The

contradictions of Indian rural society in the sphere of its land

relations under the colonial rule provided insights into the rural

underdevelopment and this became the basis of the rural

awakening and anti-colonial mobilisation of the peasantry by the

socialist and nationalist groups.

83 See Leela Visaria and Pravin Visaria, 'Population ( 1757-194 7)' in Dharma Kumar (ed.) The Cambridge Economic History of India, vol. 2, op. cit., pp.463-532; Report on Land Revenue Administration of Orissa, 1937-38, p.12, Asha, 31.3.1916, 21.2.1916, p. 3, Government of Bihar and Orissa, Revenue Department, Land Revenue Branch, Proceedings Nos.1-10, 1926; Government of Bihar and Orissa, Revenue Department, Land Revenue Branch, Proceedings Nos. 298-308; W.W. Dalziel, Final Report on the Revision Settlement of Orissa, 1922-1932, op. cit., pp.97-99; Government of India, Home Department, Political Branch, Fortnightly Report from Bihar and Orissa for the second half of February 1931, 18/09/1938; for a discussion on the general economic condition in Orissa during (';arly decades of the 19th century Manorama Mahapatra, "General F'£on.omic Condition of Orissa 1803-1818", Orissa Historical Research Journal, Vol.1, No.2, 1952, p.l'll.

187