[Land Reforms] British Land tenure System: features, Consequences of

Permanent Settlement, Ryotwari, Mahalwari

(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Prologue
2. What is land reform?
3. Players in Land tenure system?
1. The State
2. Owner
3. Superior tenants
4. Inferior Tenants
5. Share croppers
6. Landless laborers
4. Land Tenure System: British Legacy
5. Permanent Settlement: Features
6. Permanent Settlement: Consequences
7. Ryotwari System
1. Ryotwari System: Features
2. Ryotwari System: Consequences
8. Mahalwari System
1. Mahalwari System: Features
2. Mahalwari system: Consequences
9. Consequences of British Tenure systems
1. Land becomes a property
2. Panchayat lost Prestige
3. Food insecurity
4. Cash economy & indebted farmers
5. Serfdom
6. Rural Industry destroyed
7. Lack of Capitalist Agriculture
10. Mock Questions

Prologue
General studies Mains Paper 3: Land reforms in India.
But that is not ‘the end’ of land reform. Same topic and points also relevant for

GS Mains paper land reform topic indirectly associated with

 Freedom Struggle – its various stages and important contributors /contributions
Social empowerment
1
poverty and developmental issues
Post-independence consolidation

Ministries and Departments of the Government;

Pressure groups and formal/informal associations and their role in the Polity.
Functions and responsibilities of the Union and the States,
2 Indian Constitution: signi cant provisions
The role of NGOs in Development processes.
Issues relating to poverty and hunger
e-governance

3 Linkages between development and spread of extremism

Besides, Land reform topic is also part of many optional subjects in UPSC Mains:

Optional
land reforms included in:
Subject

Political Science Planning and Economic Development : Green Revolution, land reforms and
Paper 1 agrarian relations

Sociology Paper
Agrarian social structure – evolution of land tenure system, land reforms.
2

Geography
land tenure and land reforms;
Paper 2

Economics Agriculture: Land Reforms and land tenure system, Green Revolution and capital
Paper 2 formation in agriculture.

1. Land revenue settlements in British India: The Permanent Settlement; Ryotwari

Settlement; Mahalwari Settlement;
History Paper 2 2. Economic impact of the revenue arrangements;
3. Rise of landless agrarian labourers; Impoverishment of the rural society.
4. Land reforms

This [Land Reforms] Article series will (try to) cover following issues:

1. Three land tenure system of the British: Their features, implications

2. Peasant struggles in British Raj: causes and consequences
3. Land reforms, Before independence: by Congress governments in Provinces, their bene ts and
limitations
4. Land reforms, After independence: abolition of Zamindari, Land Ceiling and Tenancy reforms. Their
bene ts and limitations
5. Land reforms by non-governmental action: Bhoodan, Gramdan, NGOs etc. their bene ts and
limitations
 6. Land reforms in recent times: Computerization of land records, Forest rights Act, land reform policy
etc. their bene ts and limitations.

Sources used for this [Land reform] Article series

1. IGNOU MA (Rural Development) Course code MRDE 003

2. Bipin Chandra: India’s struggle for independence
3. Bipin Chandra: Freedom Struggle, NBT
4. Bipin Chandra: Indian since independence
5. Sumit Sarkar: Modern India (1885, 1947)
6. Rajiv Ahir, Brief History of Modern India, Spectrum
7. Ramchandra Guha: India After Gandhi
8. pib.nic.in, Indianexpress, TheHindu, PRSIndia etc. as and where necessary

What is land reform?

Robin Hood took money from rich and redistributed among the poor.
Similarly land reform involves taking away land from rich and redistributing among landless.
Although land reform involves not just about ‘redistribution of land’. It involves many other reforms,
example:

1. Abolish intermediaries, Zamindar, Jagirdar etc.

Static (50s to 80s) 2. land ceilings- redistribute surplus land
3. Tenancy reforms

1. computerize land records

current (after 80s) 2. forest rights act
3. land consolidation

Formal de nitions

de nition Land reforms mean:

#1 Improving land tenure and institutions related to agriculture.

redistribution of property rights

#2
For the bene t of the landless poor.

integrated program
#3 to remove the barriers for economic and social development
Caused by de ciencies in the existing land tenure system.

Observe that word “tenure/Tenancy” keeps reappearing. So what does that mean?

Tenancy:
 Tenancy in derived from the word ‘tenure’ = ‘to hold’.
Tenancy= Agreement under “tenant” holds the land/building of the original owner.

Players in Land Tenancy system?

1. enforces tenancy contracts

2. Maintains law and order.
The State
Earns revenue for doing 1+2

The owner: the guy who owns land

They pay Revenue to the State.
Rich farmers, Zamindars etc. own hundreds of acres of land. Can’t cultivate it on
Owner their own.
Similarly minors, disabled, widows, soldiers, shermen may also own land but
they can’t cultivate for one reason or another.
So these people ‘lease’ their land to other farmers (tenants).

They cultivate on land leased from the ^owner.

These are hereditary tenants. Meaning they cultivate same land generation after
generation.
Superior They pay rent to the owner.
tenants They have almost the same rights as the owners.
They can sell, mortgage or rent out the land.
They cannot be evicted against their will.

Other names: tenants at will, subordinate tenants, temporary tenants,

subtenants.
They till the land leased from other tenants/owners.
Inferior They pay rent to the owners/superior tenants.
Tenants They have limited rights over the land.
They cannot sell or mortgage the land.
They can be evicted easily.

Sharecroppers= cultivate other person’s land (Owner, Superior/inferior tenant)

They get share from the produce, and remaining goes to the tenant/owner.
The equipment and inputs items may be provided owner/tenant
Share
croppers They have no rights whatsoever on the land.
They cannot sell, rent or mortgage the land.
Can be evicted easily.

1. They get paid in cash or kind by the owners (or tenants)

Landless
laborers 2. Sometimes work under begari/bonded labour.

Ok well and good. So far we know: what is land reform and who are the players in a land tenancy system.
We have to study land ‘reform’.  Meaning some badass thuggary was going on, otherwise if everything was
well and good, then there was no need for ‘reforms’! So what was the cause of
thuggary/grievance/resentment? Ans. Land tenure systems of British.
 Land Tenure System: British Legacy
In the initial years, East India company faced following problems:

1. Demand for British goods in India=negligible. (Because East India company was yet to destroy our
handicraft and artisans)
2. Under the Mercantilism policy of British: one country’s gain required another country/colony’s loss.
Therefore, British Government prohibited East India company from exporting gold and silver from
England to pay for Indian goods import.
3. Company needed truckload of ca$H to maintain an army for defeating and subjugating native rulers.

East India company came up with following solution:

1. start collecting revenue from Indians

2. Use that Revenue to buy Indian raw material- export to England
3. Import nished goods back to India=> make pro t.

But this solution had a problem: the revenue system under Mughals and Native rulers=too complex for
the British to understand, and there were no coaching classes or Wikipedia to help white men understand
this complex system.

Lord Cornwallis comes with a novel idea: just ‘outsource’ the tax collection work to desi-middlemen:
Zamindars, Jagirdar, Inamdars, Lambardar etc. Consequently, British introduced three land tenure
systems in India:

(http://www. ickr.com/photos/97816112@N02/10405936023/)
 Tenure
Presidency Features:
system

Who? Cornwallis + John Shore. In Bengal + Bihar. 1793

Company ‘outsourced’ the revenue collection work to Zamindars
1. Bengal
Very exploitative. Led to many revolts. Hence British didn’t
Permanent 2. Bihar
implement it in other parts of India.
settlement
In Awadh/Oudh, Lord Delhousie wanted to implement Mahalwari
(BeBi)
but then 1857’s munity broke out. Later Lord Canning introduced
Talukdari system-similar to Permanent settlement.

Who? Thomas Munro and Read in Madras. (1820)

Who? Wingate and Goldsmid in Bombay (1835). In 1820 it was tried
1. Madras,
in Poona but failed. Later Wingate and Goldsmid start Bombay
2. Bombay
Survey System in 1835 for individual settlement system.
Ryotwari 3. Assam
Company directly collected revenue from farmers.
Madras was initially under Permanent settlement type system but
(MBA)
Thomas Munro convinced the directors of East India company to
convert this area under Ryotwari / direct settlement system.

1. Gangetic
valley
2. north- Company ‘outsourced’ revenue collection work to Village community
west itself. –Technically village headman (Lambardar) was made
Mahalwari provinces, responsible for tax collection
3. parts of North West Provinces initially had Permanent settlement but
central transformed to Mahalwari system by Holt Mackenzie.(1822)
India
4. Punjab

Overall coverage

Tenure system % of Agri.land in British Provinces

Zamindari 57

Ryotwari 38

Mahalwari 5

Total 100%

Permanent Settlement: Features

1. Cornwallis + John Shore. In Bengal + Bihar. 1793
2. All the land belonged to the state and was thus at their disposal.
3. British designated zamindars (local tax collectors) , as owners of the land in their district. This system
was adopted in several forms such as Zamindari, Jagirdari, Inamdari, etc.
4. These zamindars had to collect revenue from farmers and deliver to the British.
 5. Converted Zamindars into landlords. The right to the land conferred on the zamindars was
6. Revenue amount was xed at the beginning and remained the same permanently.
7. Zamindar were given freedom to decide how much to demand from the cultivators. Sti penalties on
defaulters.
8. there was a provision of keeping a portion of taxes for the zamindar himself.
9. Zamindar’s right over land was
1. Alienable: meaning British could take it away and give it to another Zamindar, if rst Zamindar did
not meet the Revenue collection ‘targets’.
2. Rentable: meaning Zamindar himself could further outsource his work among more smaller
zamindars
3. Heritable: meaning Zamindar dies, his son/brother etc would get it.
10. Farmers became tenants. Two types
1. Tenants-at-will:  farmers who cultivated on Zamindar’s land. They had no rights. They could be
evicted as per whims and fancies of Zamindar.
2. Occupancy Tenants: farmers who owned land. Their occupancy rights were heritable and
transferrable and were not tampered with as long as they paid their taxes.

Permanent Settlement: Consequences

#for British

gave nancial security for the British administration.

Cost of running administration decreased. Because British had to collect Revenue from only a few
Zamindars instead of lakhs of farmers.
British got new political allies (Zamindars). They would keep their own militia to suppress peasant
revolts, and act as ‘informers’ and remained loyal to British rule.

#learning from mistake

Permanent settlement system led to many agrarian revolts.

Government’s income declined over the years, Because Revenue was permanently xed + number of
intermediaries kept increasing.
Hence, British learned from the mistake and did not extent this permanent settlement/Zamindari
system to the whole of India. Instead, they established Ryotwari and Mahalwari systems in the
remaining parts.

#Farmers lose bargaining power

Textile industry was the driver of industrial revolution in Britain. = raw cotton imported + nished
textile exported to India.
To prevent any ‘competition’ from Desi textile industries, the British imposed variety of taxes and
tari s on them=>desi textile business collapsed. Lakhs of weavers became unemployed, migrated to
 villages in search of work.
Since they did not own any land, they had to become tenants-at-will  for Zamindars.
Now Zamindars had the monopoly of controlling livelihood of thousands of people. They extorted
more and more taxes.
Moreover, the “begar”, unpaid work which the tenants were forced to perform on the zamindar’s land,
took larger proportions. On the average, it amounted to 20-25 % of the lease.
Western Bengal: Farmers got divided into two categories i) Jotedars (Rich farmers) ii)Bargadar
(Sharecroppers)
Eastern Bengal: Jute cultivation. Independent farmers with small to middlesize land holdings

#More outsourcing

Permanent settlement system created landed aristocracy for the rst time in India. Zamindars used to
chow down part of the land Revenue collected. Thus they became wealthy and lazy. They ‘outsourced’
their work to more intermediaries / sub-tenants.
It became quite common to have 10 to 20 intermediaries, more or less without any speci c function,
between the government and the farmers, And they all had a share in the cultivation yield + other
illegal taxes.
As a result, 70-80% of farmer’s produce went to just Revenue and commissions only=> poverty, debts.
None of these middlemen or Zamindars invest money in agricultural improvement or new technology.
They just kept increasing rents. Hence traditional agriculture did not shift to capitalist agriculture,
unlike other economies.

Ryotwari System
By Sir Thomas Munro at rst in Madras State and then adopted in Bombay, and Assam. But Why?

1. In permanent settlement areas, land Revenue was xed. But over the years, agriculture prices/exports
should increase but government’s income did not increase. (Because middlemen-zamindars chowed it
down)
2. Zamindars were oppressive- leading to frequent agrarian revolts in the permanent settlement areas.
3. In Bihar, Bengal, there existed Zamindar/feudal lords since the times of Mughal administration. But
Madras, Bombay, Assam did not have Zamindars / feudal lords with large estates. So, hard to
‘outsource’ work, even if British wanted.
4. No middlemen in tax collection=> farmer has to pay less taxes=>increased purchasing power=>will
improve demand for readymade British products in India.

Consequently, all subsequent land tax or revenue settlements made by the colonial rulers were
temporary settlements made directly with the peasant, or ‘ryot’ (e.g., the ryotwari settlements).

This model was based on English yeomen farmers.

 Ryotwari System: Features
1. government claimed the property rights to all the land, but allotted it to the cultivators on the
condition that they pay taxes. In other words, It established a direct relation between the landholder
and the government.
2. Farmers could use, sell, mortgage, bequeath, and lease the land as long as they paid their taxes. In
other words Ryotwari system gave  a proprietary rights upon the landholders.
3. IF they did not pay taxes, they were evicted
4. taxes were only xed in a temporary settlement for a period of thirty years and then revised.
5. government had retained the right to enhance land revenue whenever it wanted
6. Provided measures for revenue relief during famines but they were seldom applied in real life
situation.

Ryotwari System: Consequences

Farmers had to pay revenue even during drought and famines, else he would be evicted.
Replacement of large number of zamindars by one giant zamindar called East India Company.
Although ryotwari system aimed for direct Revenue settlement between farmer and the government
but over the years, landlordism and tenancy became widespread. Because textile weavers were
unemployed= they started working as tenant farmers for other rich farmers. In many districts, more
than 2/3 of farmland was leased.
Since Government insisted on cash revenue, farmers resorted to growing cash crops instead of food
crops. And cash crop needed more inputs=>more loans and indebtedness.
After end of American civil war, cotton export declined but government didn’t reduce the revenue. As
a result most farmers defaulted on loans and land was transferred from farmers to moneylenders.

Mahalwari System
Location:  Gangetic valley, north-west provinces, parts of central India and Punjab. But why?
In North India and Punjab, joint land rights on the village were common. So, British decided to utilize
this utilize this traditional structure in a new form known as Mahalwari system.

Mahalwari System: Features

1. unit of assessment was the village.
2. taxation was imposed on the village community since it had the rights over land.
3. The village community had to distribute these tax collection targets among the cultivators
4. Each individual farmer contributed his share in the revenue.
5. Everyone was thus liable for the others’ arrears.
6. Farmers had right to sell or mortgage their property.
7. The village community did not necessarily mean entire village population. It was a group of elders,
notables of high castes.
8. A village inhabitant, called the lambardar, collected the amounts and gave to the British
 9. British periodically revised tax rates.

Mahalwari system: Consequences

Since Punjab, Northern India = fertile land. So British wanted to extract maximum Revenue out of this
region. Land Revenue was usually 50% to 75% of the produce.
As generations passed- fathers would divide land among sons=> fragmentation=>farms became
smaller and smaller and productivity declined.
But still British demanded Revenue in cash. So, farmers had to borrow money to pay taxes in the case
of crop failures.
As a result, more and more farms passed into the hands of moneylenders. When farmer failed to
repay debt, Moneylender would take away his farm but he has no interest in self-cultivation so he’d
leasing it to another farmer.
Thus, sub-leasing, indebtedness and landlessness became more and more common in Mahalwari
region

Why is it called Modi ed Zamindari system?

Because in Mahalwari areas, the Land revenue was xed for the whole village and the village headman
(Larnbardar) collected it. Meaning theoretically Village itself was a landlord/zamindar.
Other names for this system: Joint rent, ‘joint lease’, ‘brotherhood’ tract (mahal) holding and ‘gram wari’
etc.

Result of British Land Tenure system: Perpetual indebtedness, exploitation. When we gained
independence, picture was following:

farmers Agro-land of India

7% villagers (richest, Zamindar and

Owned 75% of fertile land
other intermediaries)

Owned 25% of fertile land. (=imagine the land fragmentation

48% of villagers (tenants, sub-tenants)
and size of landholdings)

Owned no land. Worked as farm laborers, petty traders,

45% of villagers
craftsman etc.

Total 100% Total 100%

Consequences of British Tenure systems

Land becomes a property

Before British During British rule

 Introduced private ownership of land
private ownership of land did not exist
This divided village into 1) landlords 2)tenants
land belonged to the village
3)labourers
community
This this material transformation the agrarian society
Land was never treated as the
in India witnessed profound social, economic, political,
property of the kings -benevolent or
cultural and psychological change.
despotic, Hindu, Muslims or Buddhist.
with generations- land kept dividing among
Land was not treated as individual
sons=>land fragmentation, diseconomies of scale,
cultivator’s property either.
lower production.

Panchayat lost Prestige

Before British During British rule

Farmer had to approach British courts for matters

Land matters and civil disputes were
related to Revenue, property attachment, debt-
adjudicated by Panchayat within the
mortgage etc.
village.
Panchayats lost their power and prestige

Food insecurity

Before British During British rule

Since British demand revenue in CASH, farmers resorted to

growing cash crops: indigo, sugarcane, cotton=> Area under
farmers usually grew
foodcrop cultivation declined
foodcrops- wheat, maize,
Then, Lacks of People would die of starvation during famines.
paddy, jowar, bajra and pulses
Even after independence, and before green revolution- India
was not self-su cient in grain production.

at independence India was faced with an acute food shortage

near-famine conditions in many areas.
Between 1946 and 1953 about 14 million tonnes of foodgrains worth Rs 10,000 million had to be
imported = this was nearly half of the total capital investment in the First Five Year Plan (1951–56).

Canals

Before British During British rule

British did construct new canals

Kings constructed
Positive: more area brought under cultivation, particularly in Punjab.
ponds, canals and
but most canals caused salinity and swamps=>declined productivity
wells to improve
over the years
agriculture
Taxes on Irrigation were quite high. Therefore Canal irrigation was used
irrigation taxes were
to grow sugar, cotton and other cash crops, instead of food
moderate.
crops=>food insecurity, starvation and death during famines.
 Cash economy & indebted farmers

Before British During British rule

British obliged the farmers to pay revenue in cash and not in

kind.
Land Revenue was paid in The land revenue was increased arbitrarily to nance British
kind. wars and conquests. But The farmers had no right to appeal in
Village was a self-su cient the court of law.
economy with cooperative Farmers had no understanding of cash economy + frequent
units. droughts and famines
e.g. blacksmith would make Hence they had to borrow money from unscrupulous grain
farm-tools, would get yearly traders and money-lenders=> compound interest rate,
payment in grains/kind. perpetual indebtedness.
Moneylending, mortgaging Eventually, the typical Indian villager was stripped of all
were negligible. savings, caught in debt trap, mortgaging almost everything-
whether personal jewelry, land and livestock, or tools and
equipment.

Collective village life based on

common economic interests A new village came-where existence was based on competition
and resultant cooperative and struggle among independent individuals.
relations

Farmers shifted from food crop to Cash crops. But cash crops need more inputs in terms of seeds,
fertilizer, and irrigation, hence farmer had to borrow more.
This brought moneylenders, Shro , Mahajan, Baniya, into limelight- they were in control of village land
without any accountability.
Thus British land revenue system transfered ownership of land from farmer to moneylender.
towards about the end of the colonial period, The total burden on the peasant of interest payments on
debt and rent on land could be estimated at a staggering Rs 14,200 million
According to RBI’ss survey in 1954:

credit supplier gave ___% of farmers’ loan requirements

moneylenders 93%

government 3%

cooperative societies 3%

commercial banks 1%

Serfdom

Before: slavery/bonded labour/Begari almost non-existent. But During British raj

 Zamindars gave loan to farmers/laborers and demanded free labour in return.
This practice prevented farmers/laborers to bargaining wages.
Begari, Bonded labour, or debt bondage became a common feature in large parts of the country.
Even in ryotwari areas, upper caste controlled the land. Lower caste was reduced to sharecroppers
and landless laborers.

Rural Industry destroyed

Before British During and After British rule

de-urbanization and de-industrialization of India

This led to even greater pressures on agriculture since
India was steadily becoming more large categories of highly skilled artisans and non-
urbanized, agricultural workers were thrown out of work.
Signi cant portion of the Indian When the British left, India had become a village-based
population living in large or small agricultural economy.
towns. With an enormous population pressure on agriculture
and an adverse land–man ratio of about 0.92 acre per
capita at independence.

Trade tari s and excise duties were set so as to destroy

Even in Villages, there was skilled
Indian industries, and squeeze domestic trade.
artisans like weavers, potters,
Bihar and Bengal: severe restrictions were placed on
carpenters, metal-workers, painters
the use of inland water-ways — causing shing and
etc.
inland shipping and transportation to su er.

Lack of Capitalist Agriculture

In most economies, the evolution is traditional farming=>capitalist farming methods. But in India, it did
not happen, why?

1. Large landowners in zamindari and ryotwari areas leased out their lands in small pieces to tenants.
2. Small tenants continued to cultivate them with traditional techniques= low productivity.
3. Rich farmers/ zamindars lacked the riskbearing mindset for capitalist mode of production (i.e. invest
more money in seeds, fertilizer, animal husbandry, contract farming,  large-scale capitalist agriculture
using hired wage labour under their direct supervision. etc).
4. Even if they wanted to take ‘risk’, government did not give any agricultural support, credit, insurance
etc. yet demanded high taxes.
5. It is not surprising, therefore, that Indian agriculture, which was facing long-term stagnation, began to
show clear signs of decline during the last decades of colonialism.

farming technology in 1951 % of farmers

wooden ploughs 97%

iron plough 3%
 Use of improved seeds, arti cial fertilizers, etc rare

some more points

Independent Farmer / tenant was hardly left with any money to re-investment in
Drain of
agriculture. Most of his ‘surplus’ income/pro t went into paying taxes. These taxes were
Wealth
used for exporting raw material from India to Britain. = Drain of wealth.

Social when individuals or small group of farmers couldnot organize a collective action against
Banditry Zamindars/government, they started robbery and dacoity.

When India got independence, the situation was:

VILLAGERS ASSOCIATED WITH FARMING AGRO-LAND

7% villagers (richest, Zamindar and other

Owned 75% of fertile land
intermediaries)

Owned 25% of fertile land. (=imagine the land

48% of villagers (tenants, sub-tenants)
fragmentation)

45% of villagers Owned no land. Worked as farm laborers.

Total 100% Total 100%

Mock Questions
5 marks

1. Important features of Munro settlement.

2. Mahalwari Settlement.
3. Superior and Inferior Tenants

12 marks: comment on following statements

1. British land tenure systems were moulded by greed and desire to encourage certain type of
agricultural exports.
2. Absentee landlordism was a consequence of Bengal’s permanent settlement. Comment
3. Though the permanent settlement had serious defects, it gave tranquility to the countryside and
stability to the government.
4. Permanent settlement disappointed many expectations and introduced many results that were not
anticipated.

15 marks
 1. What the impact was of early British land tenure policy on the villages of North and Western India?
2. Examiner the major factors shaping British Land revenue policy in India. How did a ect Indian society?
3. Describe the impact of British Policy on agrarian society.
4. What were the consequences of British rule on Indian villages?
5. What were the three kinds of land settlement during British rule in India? Brie y discuss their features
and implications.
6. What do you understand by Commercialization of agriculture? Discuss its impact on rural India.

In the next article, we’ll various peasant revolts because of these oppressive land tenure systems.
 [Land Reforms] Peasant Revolts for Land reforms during British Raj

1. Prologue
2. Peasant struggles in British India
3. Peasant Revolts before 1857
1. Sanyasi Revolt, 1772
2. Pagal Panthi, 1830s-40s
3. Santhal, 1855
4. Revolts after 1857’s Mutiny
1. Indigo Movement (1859-60)
2. Deccan Riots (1874-75)
3. Ramosi, 1877-87
4. No-Revenue Movements (1893-1900)
5. Birsa Munda’s Ulgulan (1899)
6. Rajasthan: 1913-17
7. Champaran Indigo Satyagraha (1917)
8. Kheda Satyagraha (1918)
5. Peasant revolts in the 20s
1. Kisan Movement, UP (1920s)
2. Eka Movement (1920s)
3. Second Moplah Uprising (1921)
4. Bardoli Satyagraha (1928)
6. Peasant Revolts in the 40s
1. Tebhaga, Bengal, 1946
2. Telangana, Hyderabad State (46-51)
3. Varli, Bombay Province
7. Mock Questions

Prologue
This [Land Reforms] Article series will (try to) cover following issues for UPSC Mains GS/Optionals:

1. Three land tenure system of the British: Their features, implications (http://mrunal.org/2013/10/land-
reforms-british-land-tenure-system-features-consequences-of-permanent-settlement-ryotwari-
mahalwari.html). We saw in previous article.
2. Peasant struggles in British Raj: causes and consequences. Discussed in this article.
3. Land reforms, Before independence: by Congress governments in Provinces, their bene ts and
limitations. Gandhi and Ranade’s views on Land reforms, All India Kisan Sabha etc.
4. Land reforms, After independence: abolition of Zamindari, Land Ceiling and Tenancy reforms. Their
bene ts and limitations
 5. Land reforms by non-governmental action: Bhoodan, Gramdan, NGOs etc. their bene ts and
limitations
6. Land reforms in recent times: Computerization of land records, Forest rights Act, land reform policy
etc. their bene ts and limitations.

Peasant struggles in British India

Can be classi ed into following groups:

East India: Sanyasi Revolt, Chuar and Ho Rising, Kol Rising, Santhal Rising, Pagal
Before 1857’s Panthis and Faraizis Revolt
Mutiny West India:  Bhil, Ramosis
South India: Poligars

Indigo Movement (1859-60)

Pabna Agrarian Unrest (1873-76),
After 1857’s Deccan riots (1874-75),
Mutiny No-Revenue Movement  Assam, Maharashtra, and Punjab: (towards the end of
19th century)
Champaran Indigo Satyagraha (1917)

In the 20s and

2nd Moplah, Awadh Kisan Sabha, Eka movement, Bardoli etc.
30s

Congress Ministries in provinces such as Bihar, UP and Bombay (will be

discussed separately in third article)
Faizpur Congress session (1936)
During and
All India Kisan Congress
After WW2
Tebhaga Movement in Bengal
Telangana Outbreak in Hyderabad
Varlis Revolt in Western India

Peasant Revolts before 1857

(http://www. ickr.com/photos/97816112@N02/10405759494/)
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Note: I’m also including some tribal revolts that had connections with land settlement/tenancy systems.

Sanyasi Revolt, 1772

British government restricted people from visiting holy places. Sansyasi got angry
 Joined by farmers, evicted landlords, disbanded soldiers
Focal point: Rangpur to Dhaka
Leader: Manju Shah Fakir
Sanyasis defeated a company of sepoys and killed the commander. They overran some districts,
virtually running a parallel government.
This rebellion continued till the end of the 18th century.
Governor General Warren Hastings launched a military campaign against Sansyasis.
From 1800, sanyasis probably joined the Marathas to ght British.

Pagal Panthi, 1830s-40s

Reason: Zamindari Oppression

Area: North Bengal, Hajong and Garo tribes.
Leader: Karam Shah and his son Tipu
Result: Initially British agreed to Pagal Panthi demand,  made arrangement to protect the cultivators
from Zamindar
But later, launched massive military operation to suppress Pagal Panthis

Santhal, 1855

Reason:  oppression of police, atrocities of landlords and moneylenders, ill-treatment of small farmers
by land revenue o cials. Government banned shifting cultivation in forest areas.
Area: Raj Mahal hills
Leaders: Sindhu + Kanhu
Result: The government could paci ed these Santhals by creating a separate district of Santhal
Parganas.

some other revolts before 1857’s Mutiny:

Bhil
Reason: agrarian hardship
Area: W.Ghats, Khandesh
1817 to 1819

Reason: famine, land Revenue

Chuar and Ho Area: Midnapur, Chhotanagpur, Singhbhum
Tribes involved
1820 to 1837. Chuar=Midnapur
Ho and Munda= Chhota Nagpur and Singhbhum

Reason: Zamindari Oppression

Faraizis
Area: East Bengal
Leader: Faraizis were followers of a Muslim sect founded by Haji Shariatullah
1838 to 1857
of Faridpur
 Kherwar/Sapha
Against revenue settlements in tribal areas.
Har

Reason: British transferred of land from Kol headmen (Mundas) to outsiders

like Sikh and Muslim farmers.
Kol
Area: Chhota Nagpur,  Ranchi, Singhbhum, Hazaribag, Palamau and western
parts of Manbhum.

Mophah, First
uprising Malabar.
by Muslim tenants against Hindu Zamindars (Jemnis).
1836-1854

Reason: land Revenue

Poligars
Area: Dindigul, Malabar, Arcot, Madras presidency

Tiru Mir
Bengal. Against Hindu land lords, who imposed beard tax on Farazis.
1782-1831

Revolts after 1857’s Mutiny

(http://www. ickr.com/photos/97816112@N02/10405762004/)

General features:

1. After 1857’s revolt, The British had crushed down native princes and zamindars. Hence farmers
themselves became main force of agitations.
2. Target= sometimes government, sometimes moneylender, sometimes landlord/ zamindar
3. Territorial reach. not organized on mass-scale
4. Often spontaneous. no coordination
 5. lacked continuity or long term struggle.
6. never threatened British supremacy
7. farmers didn’t mind paying rent, revenue, interest on debt but only agitated when they were raised to
an abnormal level.
8. lacked understanding of colonial economic system or divide and rule policy of the British. Farmers’
agitations were based within framework of old social order, hence often failed because government
could woo a faction by granting them concession and hence movement would collapse.

Indigo Movement (1859-60)

European planters forced desi farmers to grow the indigo in Eastern India, without paying right price.
If any farmer refused- and started growing rice, he was kidnapped, women and children were
attacked, and crop was looted, burnt and destroyed.
If farmer approached court, the European judge would rule in favour of the European planter.
The privileges and immunities enjoyed by the British planters placed them above the law and beyond
all judicial control.
Finally Indigo peasants launched revolt in Nadia district of Bengal presidency. Refused to grow Indigo.
If police tried to intervene, they were attacked.
European Planters responded by increasing the rent and evicting farmers. Led to more agitations and
confrontations.
Later got support from the intelligentsia, press, missionaries and Muslims.
Result: Government issued a noti cation that the Indian farmers cannot be compelled to grow indigo
and that it would ensure that all disputes were settled by legal means. By the end of 1860, Indigo
planters should down their factories and cultivation of indigo was virtually wiped out from Bengal.

Harish Chandra editor of Hindu patriot. published reports on indigo campaign, organized mass
Mukherji meetings etc.

Din Bandhu Mitra wrote a play ‘Neel Darpan’ to portray the oppression of indigo farmers.

Pabna Agrarian Unrest (1873-76)

Area: East Bengal. Pabna=a jute growing district

Reason: Zamindars enhanced rents beyond legal limits through a variety of cesses (Abwab), Farmers
had to face costly legal a airs and forced eviction. Nuisance of moneylenders.
Leaders: Ishwar Chandra Roy, Shambhu Pal, Khoodi Mollah.

Notable features

Agrarian league formed to ght legal battle against the zamindars and organized nonpayment of rent
campaign.
 This league provided a sound platform to the peasants at a time when there was no kisan sabha or
any political party to organize the peasants.
by and large non-violent. No zamindar or agent was killed / seriously injured. Very few houses looted,
very few police stations attacked.
Hindu Muslim unity, despite the fact that most Zamindars were Hindu and farmers were muslims.
farmers demanded to become ryots of British queen and not of Zamindars.
Got support from Intellectuals: Bankim Chandra Chettarji, RC Dutt, Surendranath Benerjee etc.

Result:

This unrest resulted into Bengal Tenancy Act of 1885.

But this act did not fully protect farmers from the zamindari oppression
Even non-cultivators were given occupancy right. It gave rise to a powerful jotedar groups.
Later some of the Jotedars became as exploitative as the zamindars.

Deccan Riots (1874-75)

Area: In the ryotwari areas of Pune and Ahmadnagar of Maharashtra

Reasons

the land revenue was very high

had to pay land Revenue even during bad seasons
1860: American civil war=boom in demand of cotton export.
But In 1864, war ends=>cotton export declines, yet government raised land revenue.
Farmers had taken loans from moneylenders, but now they cannot repay=>Moneylenders took away
their land, cattle, jewelry and property.

Notable features:

1. The object of this riot was to destroy the dead bonds, decrees, etc. in possession of their creditors.
2. Violence was used only when the moneylenders refused to hand over the documents.
3. villagers led by traditional headmen (Patels)
4. Involved social boycott of moneylender. and social boycott of any villager who didn’t socially boycott
the moneylender.
5. Later got support from Poona Sarvajanik Sabha led by Justice Ranade.

Result:

1. Initially government resorted to use of police force and arrest. but later appointed a commission,
passed Agriculturists Relief Act in 1879 and on the operation of Civil Procedure Code.
2. Now the peasants could not be arrested and sent to jail if they failed to pay their debts.
 Ramosi, 1877-87

Reason:  Ramosis of Maharashtra were the inferior ranks of police in Maratha administration.
After the fall of the Maratha kingdom, they became farmers =>heavy land Revenue demands by
British.
Area: Satara, Maharashtra, Deccan
Leader:  Chittur Singh (1822), Vasudev Balwant Phadke (1877-87)
Result: Government  gave them land grants and recruited them as hill police.

No-Revenue Movements (1893-1900)

In the Ryotwari areas. Main reason: hike in land revenue.

British increase land Revenue by 50 to 70 per cent in  Kamrup and Darrang districts.
Villager decided not to pay Revenue. And socially boycotted any farmer who paid land
Assam
Revenue.
Rural elites, Brahmin led the revolt. Social boycott of anyone who paid taxes to British.

farmers wanted revenue remission under famine code during 1896-1900.

Tilak, Poona Sarvajanik Sabha sent volunteers to spread awareness among farmers
Bombay
about their legal rights under Famine code.
These campaigns spread to Surat, Nasik, Khera and Ahmedabad.

Nuisance of moneylenders.
led to assault and murder of moneylenders by the peasants.
Punjab
Result: Punjab Land Alienation Act of 1902 which prohibited for 20 years transfer of land
from peasants to moneylenders and mortgage.

Birsa Munda’s Ulgulan (1899)

South of Ranchi

Reasons

Tribals practiced Khuntkatti system (joint holding by tribal lineages)

But rich farmers, merchants, moneylenders, dikus, thekedars from Northern India came and tried to
replace it with typical Zamindari-tenancy system.
These new landlords caused indebtedness and beth-begari (forced labour) among the tribal.
Birsa Munda organized the Munda tribals, attacked churches and police stations.

Result:

Birsa died in jail, while others shot dead, hanged or deported.

Government enacted Chotanagpur Tenancy Act 1908.
recognized Khuntkatti rights
 banned eth Begari (forced labour)

Rajasthan: 1913-17

Bijolia Movement and No tax campaign against Udipur Maharana

reason: The jagirdar levied 86 di erent cesses on farmers.
leaders: Sitaram Das, Vijay Singh Pathik (Bhoop Singh), Manik lal Verma
Farmers refused to pay taxes, migrated to neighboring states
1922: Bhil movement against begari (forced labour)

Champaran Indigo Satyagraha (1917)

Area: Champaran district of Bihar. Ramnagar, Bettiah, Madhuban.

European planters forced Indian farmers to cultivate indigo on 3/20th of their land holding. Popularly
known as tinkathia system.
Under this system, European planters holding thikadari leases from the big local zamindars forced the
peasants to cultivate indigo on part of their land at un-remunerative prices and by charging
sharahbeshi (rent enhancement) or tawan (lump sum compensation)
if the farmer did not want to grow indigo, he had to pay heavy nes

1916 A farmer Raj Kumar Shukla contacted Gandhi during Congress Session @Lucknow.

Mahatma Gandhi launched an agitation. Demanded a detailed enquiry and redressal of

1917
farmers’ grievances.

Result:

1. Government appoints a committee, even included Gandhi as one of the member.

2. Government abolishes tinkhatia system and pays compensation to the farmers.
3. Gandhi gets new allies: Rajendra Prasad, JB Kriplani, Mahadev Desai and Braj Kishore Prasad

Kheda Satyagraha (1918)

Severe drought in Khera District, Gujarat

Kanbi-Patidar farmers. Making decent living through cotton, tobacco and dairy. But Plague and famine
during 1898-1906 reduced their income. Yet government increased Revenue demand.
Prices of essential commodities: kerosene, salt etc increased because of WW1.
Farmers requested government to waive the land Revenue. Government ignored.
Gandhi + Sardar Patel launched “no-revenue” campaign

Result:
 1. Government reduced revenue to 6.03%
2. Government ordered o cials to recover Revenue only from those farmers who were willing to pay.
3. Gandhi gets new ally: Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel

Peasant revolts in the 20s

(http://www. ickr.com/photos/97816112@N02/10408583336/)

General features

1. Often turned violent/ militant. Created a divide between local leaders and Nationalist
Leaders/Congress/Gandhi
2. Sign of fear among middle-class leadership that movement would turn militant.
3. Government used full police force and suppression.
4. Farmers didn’t demand abolition of rent, zamindari. They only wanted a fair system of land tenancy.

Kisan Movement, UP (1920s)

Awadh farmers were su ering because:

1. Lack of occupancy rights on land in many regions.

2. Exaction by landlords of tributes, cesses, gifts, forced labour and excessive rent.
3. Periodic revision of land revenue in ryotwari areas.
4. Heavy indebtedness to the village land lords or money lenders.
5. World war I = steep rise in the price of food grains bene ting middlemen and merchants at the cost of
the poor.
6. Farmers had to pay Larai Chanda (War contribution) during WW1.
 7. To counter Gandhi/Congress’s in uence, the Government wanted to win over Talukdars in Avadh.
Hence, they gave free hand to Taulkdars regarding rent collection, eviction etc.
8. As a result, Begari (forced labour) and Bedakhli (evicting tenant for land) became a common sight.
9. +caste domination: “Jajmani system” under which, lower caste were oblighted to supply ghee, cloths
etc free/@discounted prices to upper caste.

UP Kisan Sabha setup.

1918
by Home Rule leaders Gauri Shanker Mishra and Indra Narain Dwivedi with the support of
Madan Mohan Malviya.

Baba Ramchandra organized peasants of Awadh against the landlords, using Ramayana and
1920
caste sloghans.

Methods of Awadh Kisan Sabha

1. asked farmers to stop working on bedakhli land (i.e. from  where earlier farmer was evicted)
2. asked farmers to stop giving Begari and Jajmani.
3. Social boycott of farmers who did not obey 1+2.
4. By 1921, this movement turned militant and spread to districts of Eastern UP. involved looting,
ransacking, attacking zamindar properties.
5. agitators raided the houses of landlords and moneylenders, looted bazaars and granaries

Result:  Government amended Awadh Rent Act in 1921 and AKS ceased violence.

Later All India Kisan Sabha emerged. Discussed separately in third article along with Congress Provincial
government .

Eka Movement (1920s)

Eka=unity movement
Initially by Congress+Khilafat Leaders. Later Madari Pasi and other low caste leaders.
Reason: oppression by Thekedar. High rents
Involved religious ritual, in which farmer would take a tip in Ganges and vow not to do begari, resist
eviction etc.
Even included some small zamindars who were unhapped with British demands for high revenue.
By 1922 severe repression by government=Eka Movement vanished.

Second Moplah Uprising (1921)

Reasons:

1. Hindu Zamindars (Jemnis) exploiting Muslim Moplah/Mappila farmers in Malabar (Kerala)

2. rumors that British military strength had declined post WW1.
 3. Khilafat movement and general hatred towards British.

Tipping point: Police raided a mosque to arrest a Khilafat leader Ali Musaliar.
Farmers attacked police stations, public o ces and houses, land records of zamindars and
moneylenders under the leadership of Kunhammed Haji.
For months, British government lost control over Ernad and Walluvanad taluks for several months.
This movement was termed as Anti-British, Anti-Zamindars and, to some extent, as anti-Hindu.
Podanur Blackhole: British put 66 Moplah prisoners into a railway wagon and completely shut it down.
They all died of asphyxiation.
Result: Hundreds of Moplah lost lives- as a result they were completely demoralized and didn’t join in
any future freedom struggles or even communist movements post independence.

Bardoli Satyagraha (1928)

Area: Bardoli, Gujarat

Reason: land Revenue increased by 22%.
Sardar Patel persuaded the farmers:
not to pay Revenue, required them to take oath in the name of their respective Hindu/Muslim
gods.
social boycott of anyone who paid revenue.
Resist eviction and Jabti (Con scation). Lock houses and migrate to Baroda State
social upliftment of Kaliparaj caste- who worked as landless laborers.
KM Munshi resigned from Bombay Legislative council.
Bombay communists and railway workers also threatened strikes and boycotts.

Result:

Government setup Maxwell-Broom eld commission.

Reduced land Revenue to 6.03%
Returned con scated land back to farmers.
Vallabhbhai got the title of “Sardar”.

Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) 1930-31

In UP, Congress asked Zamindars not to pay revenue to Government. (no-revenue)

And asked Farmers not to pay rent to Zamindars. (no rent)
But Zamindars remained loyal to British =>as a result only farmers participated in no-rent movement.

Misc. Peasant Movements in the 1920 and 30s

Great Depression started in USA, spread in Europe=> agricultural prices crashed.

But Revenue, rents and taxes remained high, impoverishing the peasants.
 farmers emboldened by Success of Bardoli Satyagraha of 1928
Many Zamindar leaders stood up in 1937’s provincial elections on Congress tickets but they were
defeated =farmers even more emboldened.

Bakasht Movement Bihar

Barhaiya Tal Bihar. To restore Bakasht land. Leader: Karyananda Sharma

Bengal, Bihar Refused to pay Chaukidari tax

Kisan ran campaign to abolish Zamindari, restore Bakshat lands. Matter

Solved when provincial congress government passed act.
Bihar

Bihar Provincial Kisan Sabha, 1929

Bombay, Central
Against forest grazing regulations
Provinces

Hajong Tribals in Garo hills. to reduce rent from 50% to 25%. Leader Moni Singh.

Maharashtra,
Karnataka, No-Revenue movement
Bundelkhand

against feudal levies, advance rents and eviction. Result: Malabar Tenancy act
Malabar, Kerala
was amended.

Punjab Riyasati Praja Mandal (1928)

Against Maharaj of Patiala – he had increased land Revenue by 19%
Punjab
farmers wanted him to abolish his land reserved for shikar (hunting)
for reduction of canal taxes.

Surat, Kheda Farmers refused to pay Revenue. Migrated to Baroda State.

Peasant Revolts in the 40s

(http://www. ickr.com/photos/97816112@N02/10408729523/)

General features:

During WW2, the peasant movements had declined.

But after the end of WW2 (1945)- peasant leaders anticipate freedom and new social order. Hence
new movements with renewed vigour.
Earlier kisan movements usually didn’t demand abolition of Zamindari. They merely wanted a fair
system of land revenue and land tenancy. But these new movements strongly demanded for abolition
of Zamindari.
Even when they were unsuccessful, they created a climate which necessitated the post-independence
land reforms and abolition of Zamindari.
Earlier movements were by and large non-violent. But now they turned militant e.g. Telangana
movement in Hyderabad state and the Tebhaga movement in Bengal. Similarly All India Kisan Sabha
openly preached militancy, violance against Zamindars.

Tebhaga, Bengal, 1946

1. in this region: Rich farmers (Jotedars) leased the farms to sharecroppers (Bargadar)
2. Flout Commission had recommended that Bargadar should get 2/3 of crop produce and jotedar (the
landlord) should get 1/3rd of crop produce.
3. Tebhaga movement aimed to implement this recommendation through mass struggle.
 Bengal Provincial Kisan Sabha
communist groups
who
lower stratum of tenants such as bargardars (share croppers), adhiars and poor
peasants, tea plantation workers etc.

against
zamindars, rich farmers (Jotedars), moneylenders, traders, local bureaucrats
whom

Suharwardy’s Government introduced Bargardari Bill. But overall, Limited success:

1. Brutal police suppression.

2. di erence of opinion
tribal elements wanted more militant protest
poor and middle level farmer support declined
urban professional did not support (Because many of them had given their village land to
Bargadars)
3. Riots started in Calcutta, demand for partition.

Telangana, Hyderabad State (46-51)

Who? Farmers of Telengana and Madras, Praja Mandal org., Communist party.
Against whom? Nizam’s o cials, landlords, moneylenders, traders
Biggest Peasant guerrilla war in Modern Indian history.
Reasons?

1. Under Asafjahi Nizam- bureaucratic domination by Muslim and Hindu elites

2. Vethi: forced labour and payments in kind by Jagirdar. Tribals were turned into debt slaves.
3. high rents, forced eviction and other forms of badass thuggary associated in a feudal area.

Why guerrilla war?

1. Arms act was implemented in slack manner. Easy to buy country made guns.
2. Congress, Arya Samaj etc. did not want Nizam/Razakars to setup an independent Hyderabad country
after independence. So they gave moral support, funding.

Result

1. revenue and rent records destroyed

2. bonded labour/vethi disappeared, decline in untouchability
3. Agricultural wages were increased.
4. Destroyed aristocracy/feudalism from Hyderabad. Paved way for formation of Andhra State and
Vinoba’s Bhudan movement.
Why decline?

Operation Polo: In 1948, Indian government sent army to overthrow Nizam.

even after liberation of Hyderabad, the Communist had internal political di erence. The class war
turned into petty murdering of forest o cials and moneylenders. As a result movement lost support.

Varli, Bombay Province

Varli=tribals in W.India.
Kisan Sabha supported them. Later under the in uence of communists.

Against whom? forest-contractors, the moneylenders, the rich farmers, landlords, British bureaucracy.

Mock Questions
5 marks

1. Pabna movement.
9. Baba Ramdev Chandra.
2. Indigo Movement (1859-60)
10. Eka Movement
3. Deccan Riots (1874-75)
11. Kheda Satyagraha
4. Sanyasi Revolt
12. Ramosi Revolts
5. Bardoli Peasant Movement (1921)
13. Birsa Munda’s contribution in Freedom struggle
6. Indigo Movement (1959-60)
14. Tebhaga Movement
7. Pagal Panthis and Faraizis Revolt
15. Telengana movement (1946-51)
8. Peasant Movement in Avadh

12 marks

1. The most important contribution of the peasant movements that covered large areas of the
subcontinent in the 30s and 40s was that they created the climate which necessitated the post-
independence agrarian reforms. Comment
2. Write a note on Peasant movements under Gandhi’s leadership
3. Write a note on Peasants movements under Sardar Patel’s leadership.
4. Write a note on the characteristics of peasant movements in India from 1857 to Second World War.
5. Write a note on the growth of Peasant movements after 1920s.
6. Underline the critical link between the long history of the national and peasant movements in India
and the nature and intensity of the land reform initiatives taken after independence.
7. What were the important peasant struggles that took place on the eve of Indian independence?

In the next article, we’ll see the land reforms initiated by Provincial Congress governments before
independence, role of All India Kisan Sabha, views of Gandhi and Ranade on Land reforms etc.
 [Land Reforms] Role of Indian Congress in Land reforms during the British Raj,
Gandhi’s Views on Land Reforms, All India Kisan Sabha
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Prologue
2. #1: Land reforms Congress in Provincial Governments 1937
1. @Bihar
2. @Uttar Pradesh
3. @Bombay
4. @Other Provinces
5. Overall Limitations
3. #2: Congress Resolutions 4farmers
1. @Karachi session, 1931
2. @Firozpur Session, 1936
3. @election manifesto,1937
4. Other resolutions/Manifestos
4. Rise of All India Kisan Sabha
1. Kisan Manifesto, 1936
2. Limitation of All India Kisan Sabha
5. Gandhi’s Views on Land Reforms
6. Justice Ranade’s Views on Land reforms
7. Mock Question

Prologue
so far we’ve seen

1. Three land tenure system of the British: Their features, implications (http://mrunal.org/2013/10/land-
reforms-british-land-tenure-system-features-consequences-of-permanent-settlement-ryotwari-
mahalwari.html).
2. Peasant struggles for land reforms in British Raj: causes and consequences
(http://mrunal.org/2013/10/land-reforms-peasant-struggles-for-land-reforms-during-british-raj.html).

Now in this article we’ll see Role of Indian Congress in Land reforms during the British Raj. This can be
studied under two heads:

1. When Congress formed ministries in the di erent provinces (1937), what did they do?
2. What resolutions did they pass in various sessions?

+ additional topics: Gandhi’s views on Land reforms, Ranade’s view on Land reforms and the rise of All
India Kisan Sabha.
 #1: Congress Provincial Governments 1937
After the provincial elections in 1937, Congress formed government in

1. Madras
2. Bombay
3. Central  Provinces
rst
4. Orissa
5. Bihar
6. UP

later Assam, North West Frontier Province

And they implemented certain land reforms in these provinces:

@Bihar

Good

1. Enacted “Restoration of Bakasht Land Act”- to give back land to farmers who were evicted between
1929-1937.
2. enacted Bihar Tenancy Act
3. Reduced the salami rates.
4. Abolished all increases in rent since 1911. As a result, rents were reduced by ~25%
5. gave under-ryots occupancy rights after twelve years of cultivating the land.
6. rents had to be reduced if soil degraded, owner didn’t provide irrigation etc.
7. Existing arrears of rent reduced.
8. interest on rent-arrears reduced from 12.5 to 6.25%
9. Debt Relief act: Reduced interest rate on debts to 9%
10. Prohibited all illegal exactions. if landlord charged illegal dues, he could be jailed for 6 months.
11. In sharecropping, landlord’s maximum share was kept at 9/20 part of the produce.
12. if tenant doesn’t pay rent- he cannot be arrested, his property cannot be attached

Not-Good

Kisan leaders wanted Congress government to abolish zamindari and redistribute the land among
poors.
But the Congress Government in Bihar was backed by the zamindars
Therefore, zamindari abolition law couldnot be made.
Bihar Kisan Sabha resorted to militancy- use of Lathis and violence to prevent rent payments, forcibly
occupying Zamindari land etc. Congress government resorted to use of police and section 144=>
relations between Kisan Sabha and Congress deteriorated.

@Uttar Pradesh
Good:

The Congress leaders was more ‘leftist’ than in Bihar. Hence laws/regulations were more pro-farmer
Reduced rents
Tenants of Awadhs and Agra were given hereditary occupancy. (Meaning Zamindar can’t evict family’s
farm if the father died.)
Rent of hereditary tenant can be changed only after 10 years.
Tenant cannot be arrested, if he doesn’t pay rent.
Nazrana (forced gifts) and Begari (Forced labour) were abolished.

Not-Good:

Governor did not give his assent to the Tenancy Bill even after two years of its passage. Hence most
reforms couldn’t be implemented.

@Bombay

During Civil Disobedience movement (CDM) the British had attached lands of farmers who did not pay
Revenue
The congress Government restored the land back to those farmers
Forest Grazing fees were abolished.
40,000 bonded labour (Dubla/serfs) were liberated
Debt Relief act: Reduced interest rate on debts to 9%. Although it was opposed by Lawyers who
supported Congress. (Because lawyers earned a lot from debt related court cases).

@Other Provinces

Passed: Tenancy act to reduced interest rate on arrears from 12.5 to 6% and provide for free
transfer of occupancy holdings.
Orissa

Failed: bill to reduce rents in Zamindari areas. because governor didn’t give assent.

Congress Socialist Party and Communists had setup peasant associations (Krishak
Kerala Sangathan)
organized a campaign towards amendment of the Malabar Tenancy Act.

Andhra Congress ministry passed law to give debt relief to farmers

agitations against Canal Tax

Bengal Hat Tola Movement: in north Bengal against a levy collected by the landlords from
peasants at Hat (weekly market).

Agitation against the Union Ministry dominated by landlords of western Punjab for
Punjab
resettlement of land revenue and against increase in canal tax and water rate.
 Grazing fees reduced.
Debt Relief act: Reduced interest rate on debts to 6.25%
Committee under Revenue minister T.Prakasam, made recommendations to reduce
Madras
Zamindar’s rent by 75% (and thus virtually abolishing Zamindari).
CM Rajagopalachari planned to implement this reform, withou paying Zamindars any
compensation. But before a bill could be drafted, the ministry resigned.

most
laws regulating the activity of the moneylenders and providing debt relief.
states

Overall Limitations

1. Time limit: They were in power for barely 28 months. They had resigned in 1939. So, long term
reforms could not be carried out. Example: In Madras State CM Rajagopalachari planned to reduce
rents by 75%, abolish Zamindari without paying Zamindars any compensation. But before a bill could
be drafted on the, the ministry resigned.
2. Vote power: In Orissa the British governor refused assent to a bill that aimed to reduce Zamindar’s
income by 50-60%.
3. Appeasement: Had to maintain unity for anti-British struggle. so, could not a ord to annoy upper
caste/rich farmers beyond a level. Congress ministries did not pursue abolition of zamindari in UP and
Bihar (despite resolutions from Congress PCCs in UP and Bihar).
4. Power Limit: Under the Act of 1935, Provincial governments lacked the power to abolish Zamindari,
even if they wanted.
5. Creamy Layer: By and large only superior tenants bene ted from these Acts/laws. The
subtenants/inferior tenants/agri.labourers were overlooked. May be because they did not form ‘vote-
bank’ as Act of 1935 provided for a restricted franchise.

#2: Congress Resolutions 4farmers

(http://www. ickr.com/photos/97816112@N02/10408729523/)

@Karachi session, 1931

list of ‘Fundamental Rights and Economic Programme’ for future India,

drafted by Dr.Rajendra Prasad. It included following provisions for land reforms:

1. Reduction in agricultural rent or revenue paid by the peasantry

2. Farmers with uneconomic holdings, will be exempted from rent payment
3. Debt Relief for farmers. control of Usury
4. Serfdom/Bonded labour will be abolished.
5. Farmers and workers will have right to form unions to protect their interests.
6. Progressive income tax on agricultural income.

Limitation: Didn’t include the demand to abolish Zamindari / Estates of landlords.

President: Sardar Patel. passed resolution for:

@Kisan Conference, 1935

zamindari abolition
peasant proprietorship without intermediaries

@Firozpur Session, 1936

 thirteen point program for All India agrarian reforms
Reduction in rent and revenue,
exemption from rent on uneconomic holdings,
Reduce canal and irrigation rates
living wage for agriculture labors
recognize of peasant associations
introduce cooperative farming

In a way, this Firozpur session’s Agrarian reform program= repeating Karachi Session’s points + some new
demands from All India Kisan Sabha’s manifesto.

@election manifesto,1937

1. The appalling poverty, unemployment and indebtedness of the peasantry is resulted from antiquated
and repressive land tenure and revenue systems.
2. We will give immediate relief to farmers for revenue, rent and debt burden.
3. Structural reform of the land tenure, rent and revenue systems

Other resolutions/Manifestos

1938 National Planning Committee. Chairman: Nehru

1944 Bombay Plan

1945 Election manifesto by Congress Working Committee

All of above talked about:

1. abolish intermediaries between farmer and state (Zamindar, Jagirdar, Talukdar etc)
2. Cheap loans to solve the problem of rural indebtedness
3. Collective farming should be encouraged. Although collective farming did not gain much attention
because there was hardly any peasant mobilization for this.

1946 Provincial Election

An interim government headed by Nehru was formed at the Centre and the Congress governments in
the provinces
They set up committees to draw up bills for abolition of the zamindari system.

Rise of All India Kisan Sabha

1920 Awadh Kisan Sabha formed with support of Nehru and Ram Chandra.

1923 NG Ranga formed rst Ryot’s association in Guntur, Andhra.

 Bihar Kisan Sabha formed by Swami Sahajanand Saraswati.
1928
Akali leaders formed Punjab Riyasati Praja Mandal.

1929 Bihar Provincial Kisan Sabha

1931 Krushak Sangha throughout Orissa

1935 South Indian federation of Peasants and agri.laborers with NG Ranga as Secretary.

Up to 1920, the peasant leaders were associated with the Congress. But later the rift widened because:

1. In Eastern UP, the Kisan groups wanted government to convert Sharecroppers (Bargadars) into
tenants. So they can get all legal protections available under Tenancy laws.
2. But the Swarajist  group did not want such reform. (due to pressure from Zamindar/rural elite groups)
3. di erences of opinion between the supporters of Non-Cooperation and those who preferred
constitutional agitation
4. In the princely states, Congress followed the policy of non-interferance and did not help farmers
against high Revenues.
5. In Ryotwari areas- Government itself collected taxes. So Gandhi would ask farmers to stop paying rent.
But in case of Zamindari areas, Gandhi would ask farmers to continue paying rent to the Zamindars
and Talukdars.
6. Swami Sahajanand Saraswati, prominent Kisan leader from Bihar- was turning towards leftist-militant
type of agitation. He advocated use of Lathis (sticks) against Zamindars and their goons. Hence
Congress stopped supporting him.

As a result, by mid 30s, the peasant leaders and unions became disillusioned with Congress. They felt a
need to setup a Kisan Sabha at the national level, to coordinate the e orts of regional Kisan
Sabhas/associations.

1st Sept 1936: First All India Kisan Congress @Lucknow. All India Kisan Day was celebrated on 1st
September every year.
Swami Sahajanand Saraswati (of Bihar) as its President and N.G. Ranga (of Andhra) as General
Secretary.
1938: Became All India Kisan Sabha
Launched campaigns in Andra, Bihar and UP
started Kisan Bulletin, editor Indulal Yagnik.
Gave Kisan Manifesto:

Kisan Manifesto, 1936

1. Protect farmers for  from economic exploitation,

2. 50% reduction in land Revenue
3. security of tenure for tenants,
4. reduction in interest rates charged by moneylenders
5. abolition of begar (forced labour)
6. reasonable wages for labourers,
7. promote cooperative farming
8. transfer uncultivated government land, and Zamindari lands to poor and landless farmers.

Limitation of All India Kisan Sabha

1. leadership was concentrated in the hands of Bhumihar and other rural elites
2. landless, SC, ST found no representation in its leadership
3. Kisan Sabha wanted abolition of Zamindari but not abolition of Sharecropping (Bargadari)
4. As Swami Sahjanant turned towards militant methods of protest, the Congress ordered its workers not
to participate in any activities of Kisan Sabha.
5. Congress ministries in Provinces used section 144, police force to curtail the activities of Kisan Sabha.
(especially in UP, Bihar, Orissa and Madras)

Gandhi’s Views on Land Reforms

‘Land and all property is his who will work it’, = similar to concept of land to the tiller.
During Non-cooperation movement
he asked tenants and landlors to join and ght against the most powerful zamindar- the British.
In the Ryotwari regions (where British directly collected taxes), Gandhi asked farmers to stop
paying revenue.
but in Zamindari areas, Gandhi did not ask farmers to stop paying rent. (Because he did not want
to antagonize those Zamindars/intermediaries). He explicitly industructed UP farmers….”We want
to turn Zamindars into friends. Therefore we many not withhold taxes from Government or rent
from landlord.”
During Civil Disobedience movement,
he issued a manifesto to the Uttar Pradesh farmers asking them to pay only 50 per cent of the
legal rent.
During Gandhi-Irwin Pact:

Irwin’s
Gandhi’s demand
response

wanted Irwin to return the land con scated from farmers. And if such land was sold
didn’t agree
to third parties then original farmer be paid some compensation.

agreed for only

reduce land revenue in all areas
some areas.

In Early 30s to UP farmers, “non-occupancy tenants should pay 8 anna rent to the Zamindar and
occupancy tenant should pay 12 anna rent to Zamindar. Let me warn you against listening to any advice
 that you have no need to pay the zamindars any rent at all.”
Quote: Peasants could seize the zamindar’s lands and, while there could be some violence, but the
zamindars could also ‘cooperate by eeing’.
Quote: After Independence, the zamindars’ land would be taken by the state either through their
voluntary surrender or through legislation and then distributed to the cultivators. BUT It would be
scally impossible to compensate the landlords.

Justice Ranade’s Views on Land reforms

Once UPSC asked about Sir Tejbahadur Sapru’s views on Indian Nationalist. (2006) So similar to that…
What were Justice Ranade’s views on Land reforms?

1. Replace the existing semi-feudal agriculture with capitalist agriculture.

2. Transform rich peasants into capitalist farmers.
3. Transform tenants to independent proprietors – subjected to low tax and cheap loans.
4. Quote: ‘A complete divorce from land of those who cultivate it is a national evil, and no less an evil is it
to nd one dead level of small farmers all over the land. A mixed constitution of rural society is
necessary to secure the stability and progress of the country.’
5. Post-independence, by and large same model was adopted by Government: replace landlordism and
give protection to small farmers.
6. Through Poona Sarvajanik Sabha: Supported Deccan riots and campaign against moneylenders in
Maharashtra

Mock Question
2 marks

1. NG Ranga
2. Indulal Yagnik.
3. Swami Sahajanand Saraswati

12 Marks

1. Write a note on Gandhi’s views on Land reforms.

2. Write a note on Justice Ranade’s views on Land reforms.
3. Write a note on Dr. Rajendra Prasad’s view on Land reforms.
4. Enumerate the initiatives taken by Congress ministries in the Provinces for land reforms during British
India. To what extend did they succeed in bringing land reforms?
5. Describe the role of Congress in land reforms in pre-independent India.
6. “We want to turn Zamindars into friends. Therefore we many not withhold taxes from Government or
rent from landlord.” Comment
 7.  “A complete divorce from land of those who cultivate it is a national evil, and no less an evil is it to nd
one dead level of small farmers all over the land.” Comment.
8. Write a note on the Congress resolutions for Land reforms in British India.

15 marks

1. In a sense this brief interlude of Congress rule served as a mirror of the future for both the dominant
classes in rural India and the oppressed and both learnt their lessons though perhaps somewhat
unevenly. Comment
2. Write a note on the bitter sweat relations between All India Kisan Sabha and Congress.

In the Next article, we’ll start with the land reforms in India after independence.
 [Land Reforms] Post Independence: Abolition of Zamindari, Reasons, Impact,
Obstacles, Limitations, First Amendment
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Prologue
2. What is Land reform?
3. Land reforms: broad vs narrow sense
1. What are the objectives of Land reforms?
2. Increase production
3. social justice
4. Economic development
5. Improve standard of living
4. Post-Freedom: Towards land reforms
5. Why Abolish Zamindari?
6. First Amendment, 1951
1. #1: SEBC
2. #2: Freedom of Speech
3. #3 Freedom of Profession
4. #4: Land Reforms
5. #4 Minor modi cation
7. Timeline of Zamindari Abolition by States
8. Zamindari Abolition Acts: Salient Features
1. #1: Compensation
2. #2: Common Land/resources
3. #3: Ownership transfer
4. #4: Personal Cultivation
5. #5: Direct payment of land revenue
9. Zamindari Abolition: Limitations/Obstacles/Negative points
1. #1: Land reform Delayed= Land reform Denied
2. #2: Personal cultivation
3. #3: New form of Zamindari
4. #4: Not much for Ryotwari
10. Zamindari Abolition: Bene ts/Positive points
1. #1: Agro Production increased
2. #2: Emancipation
3. #3: Changed rural power structure
4. #4: Towards an Egalitarian Society
5. #5: Rise of middleclass
11. Mock Questions
12. Appendix: the 9th Schedule
 Prologue
So far in the [Land Reform] series, we’ve seen:

1. Three land tenure system of the British: Their features, implications (http://mrunal.org/2013/10/land-
reforms-british-land-tenure-system-features-consequences-of-permanent-settlement-ryotwari-
mahalwari.html).
2. Peasant struggles for land reforms in British Raj: causes and consequences
(http://mrunal.org/2013/10/land-reforms-peasant-struggles-for-land-reforms-during-british-raj.html).
3. Land reforms, Before independence: by Congress governments in Provinces, their bene ts and
limitations. (http://mrunal.org/2013/10/land-reforms-role-of-indian-congress-in-land-reforms-during-
the-british-raj-gandhis-views-on-land-reforms-all-india-kisan-sabha.html)

Now we look into land reform measures after the independence. But rst, Let’s once again recap the
meaning and importance of land reforms.

What is Land reform?

Agro productivity is a ected by two type of factors:

INSTITUTIONAL
TECHNICAL FACTORS
FACTORS

1. land tenure system 1. climate, soil, rainfall

2. size of land 2. farm mechanization
holdings 3. farming techniques: use of hybrid seeds, fertilizer, pesticides, irrigation
3. land distribution methods

Reforms related to ^institutional factors are called land reforms.

Let’s check some more de nitions

Land Reforms is a planned and institutional reorganisation of the relation between man and
def1
land

Land Reforms mean deliberate change introduced into system of land tenure and the farming
def2
structure

Land reforms imply such institutional changes which turn over ownership of the farms to those
def3
who actually till the soil, and which raise the size of the farm to make it operationally viable.”

Land reforms mean, such measures as, abolition of intermediaries, tenancy reforms, ceiling on
def4
land holdings, consolidation and cooperative farming etc.

def5 Improving land tenure and institutions related to agriculture.

 redistribution of property rights
def6
For the bene t of the landless poor.

integrated program
def7 to remove the barriers for economic and social development
Caused by de ciencies in the existing land tenure system.

Ya but why learn so many de nition? Ans. UPSC may directly give you a de nition and ask you to
‘comment’ on it-just like they do in public administration paper I. Example

Mock Questions:

1. Land Reforms is a planned and institutional reorganisation of the relation between man and land.
Comment.
2. Land reform is not con ned to just redistribution of property rights among the landless poor.
Comment.
3. Examine the change introduced into system of land tenure and the farming structure during rst ve
year plan.
4. De ne Land reforms. Examine its role in removing the barriers for economic and social development
in India.

Land reforms: broad vs narrow sense

broad sense narrow sense

concerned with land rent, land ownership, land holding, land Concerned only with land
revenue+ credit, marketing, abolition of intermediaries, etc. ownership and land holdings.

What are the objectives of Land reforms?

or Why do we need land reforms?

Increase production

Tenant farmer has no motivation to improve agricultural practices because

He doesn’t own land=can’t get loans through banks / formal institutions.
He doesn’t own land=why bother?
He has to pay heavy rent to the landowner=hardly any surplus income left to invest in hybrid
seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, machinery etc.
In other words, the agrarian structure that we inherited from the past (Zamindari, landlessness etc.)
obstructs increase in agricultural production. Land reforms will remove these obstructions.
Land ownership/ tenure security will motivate farmers to work harder, invest more and thus produce
more =more income=standard of life improved + poverty decreased.
 For Development of Indian agriculture the importance of land reforms is greater than that of
technological reforms. (according to Nobel prize-winner Gunnar Myrdal and K.N. Raj, etc.)

1. Zamindari abolition= also eliminates Begari (forced labour)

2. Land ceiling = reduces the inequality of income and land ownership among
villagers. Provides land to landless labourers.
3. Tenancy reforms= reduces rents. Landowner cannot evict a tenant farmer
as per his whims and fancies.
social justice
1+2+3= Rural power structure changed. Upper caste domination decreased.
Empowerment of SC/ST/OBC farmers, agri.labourers.

Thus land reform=> Social justice + Egalitarian society.

1. on one hand: land reform increase production

2. on the other hand, land reforms will also provide social justice.
3. Abolishing intermediaries (Zamindar, Talukdar, Jagirdar etc)= the State
Economic directly comes in contact with farmers. This direct relation will help in rural
development Development and agri. Development as per ve year plans.

1+2+3=long term economic development.

When,

1. agro production increased

Improve
standard of 2. social justice given
living 3. Economic development achieved.

1+2+3= villagers’ standard of living automatically increases.

Mock Questions

1. “Land reforms have been treated as an integral part of eradicating poverty, and increasing of
agricultural production.” Comment.
2. Explain the role of Land reforms in providing social justice and moving towards an egalitarian society.

Post-Freedom: Towards land reforms

At this time, we had two set of victim-farmers

1. Those refugee-farmers who migrated from Pakistan.

2. Those exploited by zamindars, landlords and moneylenders.

So rst question: what was done for those refugee farmers?

Government settled them in Eastern parts of current Punjab (because from this area, muslim farmers
had migrated to Pakistan so land was available)
 First, each refugee farmer family given 4 ht. of land, irrespective of how much land they owned in
Pakistan. Government also gave them loans to buy seeds/fertilizers, so they can start temporary
cultivation.
Later, each refugee family was asked le application regarding how much land they owned in Pakistan.
These claims were veri ed by village assemblies and each family was allotted proportional land in
Punjab. by 1950 this work was nished.

Now moving to the second type of victim-farmers: those exploited by zamindars, landlords and
moneylenders. What was done for them?

November 1947:  the AICC appointed a special committee to draw up an economic programme for the
Congress.
name of this committee= Economic Program committee
Chairman= Nehru.
Other members: Maulana Azad, N.G. Ranga, G.L. Nanda, Jayaprakash Narayan etc.

For land reforms, committee recommended that:

1. All intermediaries between

the tiller and the state aka Zamindari abolition. Covered in this article.
should be eliminated

2. Maximum size of holding

should be xed. The
surplus land over such a
maximum should be aka Land ceiling. Covered in next article.
acquired and placed at the
disposal of the village
cooperatives.

Not covered in any article. because income from agriculture is

3. Present land revenue
exempted from income tax. And therefore, many lmstars use fake
system to be replaced by
papers to claim they are ‘farmers’. (and then they dance in Dawood’s
progressive agricultural
Party @dubai, earn money, manipulate the account books to show
income tax.
that cash coming from their ‘agriculture’ income and thus evade tax.)

4. All middlemen should be

replaced by non-pro t
making agencies, such as
cooperatives. aka Cooperative farming. Will be covered in future article.
5. Pilot schemes for
cooperative farming among
small land holders

6. Consolidate small land

holdings and prevent Aka consolidation of land holdings. Will be covered in future article.
further land fragmentation.
Let’s start with Land Reform Method #1: Zamindari Abolition. But rst question:

Why Abolish Zamindari?

in the rst article under [Land reform], we saw the three land tenure system of British- Zamindari,
Ryotwari and Mahalwari. (http://mrunal.org/2013/10/land-reforms-british-land-tenure-system-
features-consequences-of-permanent-settlement-ryotwari-mahalwari.html#501)
In Zamindari areas (BeBi: Bengal, Bihar), the British government outsourced the land Revenue
collection work to Zamindars. Similarly in the Princely states had Jagirdars.
These ‘intermediaries’ would:

1. Force the tenants to provide demand free labour (Begari)

2. evict tenants as per their whims and fancies = no tenure security
3. Enjoyed lavish lifestyle, did not add anything to agriculture productivity, yet charged high rent – they
were like today’s Middleman @APMC Mandi that we saw under [Food processing] article series.
(http://mrunal.org/2013/08/food-processing-nuisance-of-apmc-acts-commission-agents-marketing-of-
agricultural-produce-issues-and-constrains-for-gs-mains.html)

Therefore, it was necessary to remove these intermediaries,

1. Because Art. 23 prohibited Begari. But at the grassroot level, Begari couldnot be stopped unless
Zamindari itself was abolished.
2. Because Art. 38 wanted to minimize inequality of income, status and opportunities. When Zamindars
control ~40% of India’s cultivated land, there was no opportunity / status for tenant farmers working
under them.
3. Because Art. 39 wanted equitable distribution of the material resources of the community for
common good. But in villages, these Zamindars control ponds, lakes, forests, grazing lands etc. and
didn’t allow others to freely access them.
4. Because Art.48 wanted to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern-scienti c lines but
Zamindars were orthodox rent-seeking mindset, and tenant farmer had neither the money nor the
motivation to ‘scienti c farming’.
5. Because First Five year plan also asked for abolition of intermediaries/zamindars to increase agro.
Production, farmer’s income, to provide social justice and move towards an egalitarian society.

First Amendment, 1951

You already know that First amendment =>9th schedule, whatever laws listed this schedule, courts
cannot inquire into them. But rst Amendment is not just about 9th Schedule /Zamindari abolition. It
dealt with many other issues as well.
Microsoft released Windows 8 Operating System. Later, they realized limitations, problems with Win8,
so recently they released an upgrade Windows 8.1 to x it.
 Similarly, Constitution came into force from January 1950. But from January 1950 to May 1951 (=~15
months), government realized variety of de ciencies/problems with Constitution. So, cameup with
First amendment to x those issues in 1951.

#1: SEBC

Before Amendment

Art. 15: State cannot discriminate against any citizen…..

So according to this (original) provision, if government provided reservation or any welfare scheme for
SC/ST/OBC/PH, then general category could approach court saying we’re ‘discriminated’ against and hence
our fundamental right is violated.

Another Angle:

DPSP Art.46: State should promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the
weaker sections of the people and protect them from social injustice.

But this Directive principle cannot be implement because of Art.15

so, government had to x this inconsistency with Art.15.

After the 1st Amendment

Article 15 shall NOT prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any
socially and educationally backward classes (SEBC) of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes.
In other words, if government makes law for SEBC/SC/ST, they cannot be challenged in courts on the
grounds that Art.15 is violated.

#2: Freedom of Speech

Some courts held the 19/1/a (freedom of speech) so comprehensive and sacrosanct that

Even if a person advocated murder, violence or hatred against any

before caste/religion/person/nation, he could not be convicted.
Amendment What if an ACIO (http://mrunal.org/2013/08/studyplan-acio-general-awareness-
history-geography-science-current-a airs-preparation-previous-paper-for-assistant-
central-intelligence-o cer-acio-exam.html) leaked national security related data to a
journalist? Both could still claim immunity on the grounds of freedom of speech.
 State can make law to put “reasonable” restriction on freedom of speech, with respect
to:

1. National security
after
2. friendly relations with foreign countries
3. public order, decency or morality
4. contempt of court
5. Defamation or incitement to an o ence.

#3 Freedom of Profession

BEFORE 1ST AMENDMENT

Art. 19(1)(g): The citizen has right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or
business.

Now suppose

1. A person without MBBS degree, starts a clinic.

2. A person without doing any pharmacy course, opens a medical store

But if the State authorities tried to stop him, he could approach courts saying my fundamental right is
violated!

Another angle: According to Industrial licensing policy, atomic energy is reserved for public sector. But an
entrepreneur could challenge this in court and start his own private nuclear plant. (=risky and dangerous
from national security point of view)

AFTER 1ST AMENDMENT

1. The State CAN make laws to prescribe professional or technical quali cations necessary for practicing
any profession or carrying on any occupation, trade or business. in other words, if you open a clinic
without doing MBBS, you can be jailed and you cannot claim protection under Art.19
2. The State can make laws to carry out any trade/business/service by itself or thru its corporations. And
can exclude any businessmen, citizen or private industries from carrying out those activities. In other
words, if state reserves atomic energy or railways for public sector only then private entrepreneur
cannot approach court saying his fundamental right under Art.19 is violated.

#4: Land Reforms

BEFORE 1ST AMENDMENT

by 1949: Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Madras, Assam and Bombay states introduced
Zamindari abolition bills.
 They all used the report of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition Committee (chaired by G.B. Pant)
acting as the initial model.
but Zamindars approached courts, raising issues like ‘our right to property’ has been violated or we’re
not given fair compensation etc.
Hence Union government came up with provisions to prevent courts from entertaining such pleas.

AFTER 1ST AMENDMENT

Added three things to the constitution

1. two new articles (31 A and B)

2. one schedule (9th Schedule)

Art 31A:

State can make laws to acquire any estates / rights related to estates.
Estate =also includes any jagir, inam or mua or other similar grant;
Rights= also includes rights of any proprietor, sub-proprietor, under-proprietor, tenure-holder or other
intermediary- with respect to land revenue.
And courts cannot declare such law void, on the ground that it violates fundamental rights.
(But) if such law is made by a state legislation, then it cannot claim immunity under Art.31A, until it
receives assent from the President of India.
Sidenote: later Fifth Amendment added more laws that cannot be challenged in courts.

Art31B:

The Acts and regulations listed in 9th Schedule of the constitution = cannot be challenged in courts on
the ground that they are violating fundamental rights.
Meaning, courts are prohibited from doing any judicial review of the items listed in 9th Schedule.

9th Schedule:

The rst Amendment act listed 13 acts and regulations in 9th schedule.  all meant for abolishing
Zamindari. Meaning Zamindars could not approach courts against those laws. (boring list given
@bottom of this current article)
Later 14th Amendment, 34th Amendment etc. also added more laws related to land reforms in this 9th
Schedule. You can read more about them in Laxmikanth’s appendix for constitutional amendments.

#4 Minor modi cation

A few minor amendments in respect of articles 341, 342, 372 and 376.

Anyways we digressed much from the Zamindari abolition topic so let’s come back.
So far we’ve seen:

1. what is land reform

2. what are the objectives of land reform
3. post-independence, how we moved towards land reform
4. we saw how rst amendment 1951
modi ed freedom of speech
modi ed freedom of profession
Protected Zamindari abolition/law reform laws via Art 31A, 31B and 9th Schedule.

Now let’s talk about the actual Abolition of Zamindari:

Timeline of Zamindari Abolition by States

Era States that abolished Zamindari

1948 to 50s Madras, Bombay and Hyderabad states

1951 Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Assam

1952 Orissa, Punjab, Swarashtra and Rajasthan

1953 Vindhya Pradesh and Bhopal

1954 West Bengal, Himachal Pradesh and Delhi

Zamindari Abolition Acts: Salient Features

Since land = falls under State list, so state legislatures had to enact the zamindari abolition. Meaning no
uniformity. Di erent states have di erent provisions. But let’s check the common features of all such
state acts.

#1: Compensation

Ownership and land revenue related rights of the zamindars = abolished.

Lands transferred to the (superior) tenants.
State governments gave compensation to Zamindars ~670 crore rupees.
Some states created “Zamindari Abolition fund” and gave “Bonds” to Zamindars as compensation.
These bonds could be redeemed after a period of 10 to 30 years. (why long term bonds? why not pay
all cash upfront? think about the scal de cit angle!)

State Compensation to Zamindar

Jammu No compensation paid to them. And this also led to Hindu-Muslim bitterness because
Kashmir Almost all Zamindars were Hindu (in Jammu region).
 Compensation according to Zamindar’s income.

Small Zamindar= Annual income times 20

Uttar
Big Zamindar= Annual income times (2 or 4)
Pradesh

In other words- compensation formula inversely related to Zamindar’s income during

British raj.

#2: Common Land/resources

Example wasteland, grazing land, ponds, wells, forest area surrounding the village.
earlier Zamindars controlled such common land/resources and
charged fees from villagers, if they wanted to use it.
did not allow SC/ST to full access these common land/resources.
These Zamindari Abolition acts, transferred the ownership of such common land/resources to Village
Panchayat. And Forest area= gone to Forest department.

Bhumidhar=tenant farmers, who cultivated Zamindar’s land.

#3: Ownership In Uttar Pradesh, Bhumidhar can become owner of the land after paying
transfer 10 times the annual rent to his Zamindar.

#4: Personal Land which was cultivated by the zamindar himself = exempted from
Cultivation purview of these acts. Zamindar was permitted to keep this land.

Now Farmer was made directly liable for paying land revenue to the state
#5: Direct
payment of government. (Because Zamindar is no longer the ‘middleman’ in land revenue
land revenue hierarchy.)

Zamindari Abolition: Limitations/Obstacles/Negative points

#1: Land reform Delayed= Land reform Denied

After laws were passed, Zamindars went to SC/HC to stay the law implementation. This greatly reduced
the e ectiveness of these legislations.

^to understand this, let’s check the #Epicfail of Bihar:

1946 Bihar government passed resolution to abolish Zamindari.

Act was passed State assembly but landlords approached the courts and the government too
1949
felt it necessary to repeal the legislation.
 State legislature passed New Act, with some amendments. But Zamindars again approached
1950
courts.

Union government brings 1st Amendment, gives immunity to all such Zamindari abolition acts/
1951
regulations from judicial review.

But Even, after the law was nally implemented, the Zamindars refused to cooperate with the revenue
authorities and tried all means to scuttle it implementation.  The petty revenue o cials at Village and
Tehsil level, either turned blind eye or actively sided with Zamindars for bribes. Thus many years had
passed by for the intention of Zamindari abolition became a reality.

#2: Personal cultivation

Most state laws permitted Zamindars to keep part of land for personal cultivation. But the de nition
was vague. Zamindars misused this loophole to evict tenant farmers and keep most of the land with
themselves.
(Counter argument: Zamindar started capitalist farming in the area- led to increase in Agro-
productivity)

#3: New form of Zamindari

Main bene ciaries of zamindari abolition were the occupancy tenants or the upper tenants or superior
tenants- They had direct leases from the zamindar, and now they became virtual landowners.
But now these new landowners leased the same land to inferior tenants/sharecroppers- based on oral
and unrecorded agreements.
These inferior tenants/sharecroppers could be evicted as per the whims and fancies of the new
landowner.
Thus, even after the abolition of Zamindari, the system of ‘intermediaries’ and exploitation continued.

#4: Not much for Ryotwari

At the time of freedom, less than 50% of cultivated land was under zamindari tenure. The remaining
areas (ryotwari/Mahalwari) did not have Zamindari system but they too had system of ‘intermediaries’ 
i.e. big farmer/moneylender leasing land to small farmers- then charging excessive rent and exploiting
them.
The Zamindari abolition did not bring much relief to these people.

Overall

the Main objective of Zamindari abolition = there should be no ‘intermediary/middleman’ between the
State and the land Revenue payer (farmer). But this objective was not achieved.
Therefore, many economists do not attach much signi cance to Zamindari abolition.
They opine Zamindari abolition merely changed the hierarchy of land revenue administration, but did
not bring any change in the method of farming nor in the nature of agricultural units.
Anyways, enough of negative points, let’s check some positive points:

Zamindari Abolition: Bene ts/Positive points

1. ~1,700 lakh hectares of land was acquired from the intermediaries (zamindars) and as a consequence,
about two crore tenants were brought into direct relationship with the government.
2. Many millions of cultivators who had previously been weak tenants or tenants-at-will were became
superior tenants= virtual owners. =DPSP Art. 39 full lled (right to adequate means of livelihood
for all citizens)
3. Many absentee zamindars actually started direct ‘personal cultivation’ (so the State cannot take away
their land). They had money to buy high yielding seeds, pesticides, fertilizers, machineries=agro
productivity increased.
4. The entire process occurred in a democratic framework
5. virtually no coercion or violence was used (unlike the land reforms in China, Russia or Cuba.)
6. Finished in remarkably short period. Perhaps because Zamindars were isolated during and after
freedom struggle due to their soft corner for the British.

#1: Agro Production increased

BEFORE AFTER

Zamindar collected Revenue. Government directly collects land Revenue from farmer.

1. Cultivators have got ownership rights and hence take keen

interest in land improvement and increase in agriculture
production.
neither the zamindars, nor the 2. Government created an enabling atmosphere- agri.
cultivators took interest in cooperative society, regional rural banks etc. to provide cheap
improvememt of agriculture land credit. Subsidy on fertilizers, cheap electricity, irrigation etc.

=DPSP Art. 48 full lled (modern and scienti c agriculture and

animal husbandry)

#2: Emancipation

After abolition of Zamindari, the agricultural laborers no longer forced to give free labors=Begari,
Bonded labour declined. Art. 23 full lled.
Bargaining power of agri. laborers increased=>higher wages=>declined poverty.

#3: Changed rural power structure

Public land such as village ponds, grazing grounds, village streets etc. which was used by the
Zamindar’s as personal property, have been declared as community property. =DPSP Art. 39 full
lled (material resources of community).
 This disarmed the Zamindars of economic exploitation and dominance over others. Thus, Transferred
power from Zamindars to peasants.

#4: Towards an Egalitarian Society

Abolition of intermediaries=> asset distribution=> egalitarian society.

The Planning Commission estimates that after Abolition of Zamindari, at least twenty million tenants
were brought into direct relationship with the governments.
empowerment of those who have out of the development process.
= DPSP Art.38 full lled. (securing a social order, minimize inequality of income, status, facilities and
opportunities.)

#5: Rise of middleclass

Since the intermediaries were removed=>farmers don’t have to pay heavy rent=>these farmers could
generate pro t=>could sent their kids to school and colleges.
So in a way, land reforms helped in expansion of Indian middleclass.

Mock Questions
1. Zamindari abolition merely changed the hierarchy of land revenue administration, but did not bring
any change in the method of farming nor in the nature of agricultural units. Comment
2. Critically evaluate the signi cation of Zamindari abolition as a measure of land reforms.
3. Analyse the impact of Zamindari abolition on rural power structure. Do you agree with the opinion
that it didn’t really bene t the marginalized sections of rural society?
4. Explain how Zamindari abolition helped full lling the directive principles of state policy.
5. Land reforms could not have been initiated without enactment of the First Amendment. Comment.
6. “Land reforms have been treated as an integral part of eradicating poverty, and increasing of
agricultural production.” Comment.
7. Explain the role of Land reforms in providing social justice and moving towards an egalitarian society.
8. Land Reforms is a planned and institutional reorganisation of the relation between man and land.
Comment.
9. Land reform is not con ned to just redistribution of property rights among the landless poor.
Comment.
10. Examine the change introduced into system of land tenure and the farming structure during rst ve
year plan.
11. De ne Land reforms. Examine its role in removing the barriers for economic and social development
in India.

In the next article, we’ll the second measure of land reform: “Land Ceilings”.

Appendix: the 9th Schedule

the rst amendment had added 13 laws in the 9th schedule. And Art.31B prohibited courts from doing
judicial review on them. Here goes the boring list only for information:

1. The Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Bihar Act XXX of 1950).
2. The Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (Bombay Act LXVII of 1948).
3. The Bombay Maleki Tenure Abolition Act, 1949 (Bombay Act LXI of 1949).
4. The Bombay Taluqdari Tenure Abolition Act, 1949 (Bombay Act LXII of 1949).
5. The Panch Mahals Mehwassi Tenure Abolition Act, 1949 (Bombay Act LXIII of 1949).
6. The Bombay Khoti Abolition Act, 1950 (Bombay Act VI of 1950).
7. The Bombay Paragana and Kulkarni Watan Abolition Act, 1950 (Bombay Act LX of 1950).
8. The Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950
(Madhya Pradesh Act I of 1951).
9. The Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (Madras Act XXVI of 1948).
10. The Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Amendment Act, 1950 (Madras Act I of
1950).
11. The Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Uttar Pradesh Act I of 1951).
12. The Hyderabad (Abolition of Jagirs) Regulation, 1358F. (No. LXIX of 1358, Fasli).
13. The Hyderabad Jagirs (Commutation) Regulation, 1359F. (No. XXV of 1359, Fasli).
 [Land Ceiling] Meaning, Reasons, Pro and Anti Arguments
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Prologue
2. What is Land Ceiling?
3. Why Ceiling on Land holdings?
4. Land Ceiling in India
5. Land Ceilings: Bene ts/Advantages/Positive Points
1. With political Will
2. Production increased
3. Employment increased
4. Naxal reduced
5. Social Justice
6. Growth of New political parties
6. Land Ceiling: Pro and Anti arguments
7. Mock Questions

Prologue

So far we’ve seen

1. Three land tenure system of the How the British had di culty learning the land Revenue
British: Their features, system of Desi Nawabs. So, they came up with Permanent
implications. settlement, Ryotwari and Mahalwari systems.

2. Peasant struggles for land

But the British tenure systems caused much pain and anguish
reforms in British Raj: causes and
among Indian peasants and led to numerous revolts.
consequences.

3. Land reforms, Before

After the Provincial elections of 1937, Congress ministries took
independence: by Congress
measures to protect tenant farmers. But by and large shied
governments in Provinces, their
away from zamindari abolition.
bene ts and limitations.

4. Land reforms, After After freedom, State Governments enacted Zamindari

independence: Abolition of Abolition Acts. As a result erstwhile (superior) tenants became
Zamindari, Reasons, Impact, virtual owners of their land. =>This is First tool of Land
Obstacles, Limitations. reform.

Now comes the new problem:

1. After abolition of Zamindari, the (superior) tenant farmers became virtual owners of the land. They
owned tens and hundreds of acres of land. While other (inferior tenants/sharecroppers/landless
laborers) owned nothing.
 2. Many Zamindars themselves kept lot of land in pretext of ‘personal cultivation’.

Therefore, State governments enacted land ceiling acts. E.g.an individual farmer cannot own land beyond
say 10 acres. Thus, if a farmer owned 12 acres, government would take away 12-10=2 acres of surplus
land from him, and “distribute” it to some landless laborers. This is Second tool of Land reform.

before going further let’s again recap the players in a tenancy system

What is Ceiling on Land Holdings?

It means xing maximum size of land holding that an individual/family can own.
Land over and above the ceiling limit, called surplus land.
if the individual/family owns more land than the ceiling limit, the surplus land is taken away (with or
without paying compensation to original owner)
This surplus land is
a. distributed among small farmers, tenants, landless labourers or
b. handed over to village panchayat or
c. Given to cooperative farming societies.

Why Ceiling on Land holdings?

1. Because DPSP Art.38 seeks to minimize the inequalities of income, status, facilities and opportunities.
Land ceiling minimize inequality in the land ownership and thus reduces inequality of income.
2. Because DPSP Art.39 wants to ensure that the operation of economic system does not result in the
concentration of wealth. In a village, land=wealth, hence land ceiling is necessary to prevent
concentration of wealth in the hands of few.
3. Because DPSP Art.39 wants to give right to adequate means of livelihood for all citizens. Land ceiling
(and subsequent land redistribution) provides self-employment opportunities to landless agricultural
laborers.
4. If there is no land ceiling, rich farmers will buy all the land of entire village and tehsil. But since they
cannot cultivate all the land by themselves- they’ll ‘lease’ it to small farmers (tenants). Small farmer
(tenant) doesn’t have any ‘motivation’ to work harder because he doesn’t own the land and he has to
give 30-50-70% of the produce to that rich farmer, as “rent”= exploitation.
5. So, After abolishing Zamindari, IF State Governments had not implemented Land ceiling, then rich
farmers/superior tenants would have become the new de-facto/virtual Zamindars of Modern India.

Although, economists who believe in free market / capitalism, donot like land ceiling. We’ll see their anti-
land ceiling arguments at the end of this article. But for the moment, let’s continue with the assumption
that land ceiling is bene cial.

Land Ceiling: Pro and Anti arguments

Like I said in the middle of the article- the economists believing in free market / capitalism- they don’t like
land ceiling. So let’s hear their arguments

Anti-Land Ceiling Pro Land Ceiling

Land ceiling should be abolished. even

Agricultural income= exempted from income tax.
corporate sector should be allowed to buy
So, if land ceilings are removed, the rich people
agri. land.
will rush to buy farm land.
This will enable the enterprising farmer to
Thus land prices will soar. A new ‘intermediary’
enlarge his holding by buying or leasing
group of Agri.land ma a will emerge.
lands of small farmers.
But millions of small and marginal farmers will be
Although landlessness will increase but
pushed o their land.
these small farmers could nd employment
Hence, the time is not yet ripe to bring forth such
in agri. and allied sector as a result of
drastic reforms (of removing land ceilings).
capitalist mode of production.

Capitalist mode of agriculture=>more

surplus income=> invested back into the Capitalist mode of agriculture uses more
agriculture=economic growth. machines, less laborers=>unemployment
if corporate sector is allowed to enter in increased.
agriculture=> Agri. exports will Yes, Economic growth will be achieved but at the
increase=>more foreign exchange cost of unemployment and subsequent fall in
incoming=>Current Account de cit gone, human development.
rupee will strengthen.

large farms tend to prefer monoculture (single

crop), because they can be easily managed with
small farms are not productive because heavy machinery. = more susceptible to pest
they hinder mechanised farming attacks, not good from soil fertility point of view.
Small farmers have limited capital to invest Small farmers usually have mixed crops
in improving agro. Production. (intercropping), they combine and rotate crops
and livestock, with manure => soil fertility
improves.

Land ceiling and distribution => poverty and

disguised unemployment continues.
Villagers should be kept self-employed, even if on
Some people need to be shifted from
small and marginal farms.
agricultural sector to manufacturing/service
This ts with Gandhian ideas of village republics.
sector. There is no need to give land to
each and every landless person.

Land Ceilings: Bene ts/Advantages/Positive Points

With political Will

States with political will in favour of land ceiling=showed great progress. Example

1. Jammu and Kashmir, Land ceiling laws fully implemented and by the middle of 1955 about 230,000
acres of surplus land had been handed over to tenants and landless labourers, that too without
 having to pay any compensation.
2. West Bengal had less than 3% of total cultivate land in India. Yet more than 25% of the total surplus
land that was distributed throughout India, belonged to WB.

Production increased

1. Earlier large tracts of wasteland belonging to big zamindars/farmers remain uncultivated. Now this
given to landless laborers= increases area under cultivation=food security.
2. More Production: Equal distribution of land will encourage intensive cultivation resulting in increased
agricultural production.
3. Some Farm management studies conducted in India testi ed that small farms yielded more
production per hectare. It is so because family members themselves cultivate small farms.
4. Even one hectare of land is also an economic holding these days on account of improvement in
agricultural technique. Hence, small size of holding due to ceiling will not have any adverse e ect on
agricultural production.
5. Atleast some of the Land owners shifted to direct ‘e cient’ farming in order to get ‘exemption’ from
land ceiling.

1. Landless laborer= gets employment only during sowing and harvesting

season but now he given land ownership = he is 24/7 self-employed farmer.
Employment 2. Even if he did not get land, still other farmers got land=> more demand for
increased agri.labourers= wage bargaining power increased.
3. In other words, land ceiling increased employment opportunities.

1. With reduction in inequality among the villagers, possibility of class struggle

will be minimised.
Naxal
reduced 2. They will live with perfect peace and harmony and not join Maoists/Naxals
movements any longer. (atleast in theory)

3. In a rural economy, whoever controls land, controls the power.

4. Land ceiling Reduced this power inequality among villagers.
Social
Justice 5. Promoted spirit of cooperation among villagers. Will help develop
cooperative farming later on (atleast in theory).

Growth of New political parties

1959: N.G. Ranga, C. Rajagopalachari and Minoon Masani setup the Swatantra party.
Because they were against land ceiling, compulsory cooperativization, nationalization of private
industries etc. policies of Congress government.

1967 Charan Singh formed BKD

1974 BKD+ Swatantra Party + other parties merged=>BLD

BLD was major component of Janta Government under the great Morarji Desai who defeated
1977
Indira Gandhi.
Thus, in a way land ceiling helped destroying Congress monopoly / One party rule in Indian politics.
In the next articles, we’ll the two phases of Land Ceiling laws in India.

Mock Questions

1. Land ceiling is more of an impediment than a catalyst for economic growth. Comment
2. Evaluate the signi cance of Land ceiling as a measure of land reforms.
3. The positive impacts of Land ceiling did not trickle down below the middle rung of peasantry.
Comment.
4. De ne Land ceiling. Why was it necessary to enact land ceiling acts in post-independent India?

[Land Reform] is a long topic, I’ve split it into several parts. Therefore, to get comprehensive list of all
articles, visit Mrunal.org/Polity (http://mrunal.org/polity).
 [Land Ceiling] Phase 1: Since Independence to 1974 in India, Salient Features,
Limitations, Failures
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Ceiling Phase 1: Freedom to 1972

2. Salient Features
1. Limitations/Failures of Land Ceiling (‘47-‘72)
2. Negative#1: No redistribution
3. Negative#2: Family vs Individual
4. Negative#3: Land ceilings too high
5. Negative#4: Exempted land categories
6. Negative#5: Delay in Law Making
7. Negative#6: History repeats

Ceiling Phase 1: Freedom to 1972

(just before freedom) All India Kisan Sabha demanded a maximum limit of landownership of 25
1946
acres per landholder

Economic Program committee headed by Nehru, Recommended, ‘The maximum size of holdings
1947 should be xed. The surplus land over such a maximum should be acquired and placed at the
disposal of the village’

Congress Agrarian Reforms Committee, chaired by J.C. Kumarappa.

Recommended a ceiling on landholding which was to be three times the size of an economic
holding.
1949
An economic holding was de ned as that which would give a reasonable standard of living
to the cultivator and provide full employment to a family of normal size and at least to a pair
of bullocks.

There should be an upper limit to the amount of land that an individual may hold.
First
Exact upper limit was to be xed by each State, having regard to its own agrarian history
FYP
and present problems.

AICC Agra session: State Governments should take immediate for the xation of ceilings on
1953
land holdings, with a view to redistribute the land,

National Development Council (NDC) adopted a decision to complete the imposition of

1957
ceilings by the end of 1960.

Nagpur session of Congress. Passed resolution that

1959 All states should complete land ceiling by 1959
Surplus land should be given to Panchayats and Cooperatives of Landless laborers.

Salient Features

During this phase, Land ceiling reform ran on following principles/features: 

 1. States were given freedom to x land ceiling based on soil conditions, irrigation facilities, agrarian
history of the region etc.
2. States had to conduct census of landholdings and classify agriculture land into two parts:

Classi cation of land What to do here?

1. States had to make law, that’ll enable Tenant to

1. Land held by Tenants (i.e. after Zamindari take over this land with “patta” (i.e. document
abolition, these Tenants who had become showing possession).
virtual owners of the land.) 2. Subject to maximum land ceiling in acres. i.e.
surplus land from tenant will be taken away.

3. Owner could keep part of this land for his personal

cultivation (subject to maximum land ceiling in
acres)
2. Land held by Landowner himself
4. State will give remaining ‘surplus’ land to those
agricultural labourers, with or without paying
compensation to the original land owner.

Sounds good on paper? Yes. But Land Ceiling during this phase=EPICFAIL. Why?

Limitations/Failures of Land Ceiling (‘47-‘72)

Negative#1: No redistribution

by the end
most states passed land ceiling Acts
of 1961

Not a single acre was declared surplus in large states like Bihar, Mysore, Kerala,
by the end Orissa and Rajasthan!
of 1970 In Andhra Pradesh, a mere 1,400 acres was declared surplus but no land was
distributed.

Overall India: only 2.4 million acre declared surplus. Barely 50% of that surplus land
by the end
was redistributed among landless.
of 1970
This amounted to ~0.3% of total cultivated land of India in that era.

So why did this happen? Why didn’t land ceiling acts achieve desired result? Because of following reasons:

Negative#2: Family vs Individual


 Initially States imposed the land ceiling on individual and not on family.
So big farmers transferred their land to sons, daughters, wives, relatives (sometimes even non-
existent/dead family member) to avoid crossing the ceiling.
Many states provided extra-ceiling if family exceeded ve members. Example Andhra Pradesh had
allowing 6 to 72 acres (depending on the nature of land) per ‘extra’ member of the family.
In these day, there was no family planning= large sized family=very few families ‘crossed’ the land
ceiling.

Thus, land ceiling de nition itself defeated the noble purpose of land distribution.

Negative#3: Land ceilings too high

During this era, more than 70% of the landholdings were below 5 acres. Yet the ceilings were xed too
high, example:

State land ceiling

Andhra Pradesh 27-312 (depending on land quality)

Assam 50 acres

Kerala 15 to 37.5 acres

Punjab 30 to 60 acres

West Bengal 25 acres

Maharashtra 18 to 126 acres

Result? Very few people crossed the land ceiling. Hardly any surplus land taken away.

Negative#4: Exempted land categories

2nd Five year plan recommended following categories of land be exempted from “ceiling” laws:

1. tea, co ee and rubber plantations, orchards, 

 2. specialized farms engaged in cattle breeding, dairying, wool raising, etc.,
3. sugarcane farms operated by sugar factories
4. E ciently managed farms on which heavy investments had been made.
5. Land belonging to charitable trusts.

2nd Five year plan’s intention was good- it wanted to promote capitalist/progressive farming and make
foundation for the future green revolution.

But State government implemented this policy in letter and not in spirit. Result?

1. ‘E ciently managed farm’ was vaguely de ned. So many farmers evaded the ceilings by simply getting
themselves declared ‘e cient’.
2. Tamilnadu exempted land held by cooperatives from land ceiling act. So, Landlords transferring their
lands to bogus cooperatives.
3. Many rich farmers setup bogus charitable trusts in connivance with state o cials, then transferred
land to charitable trust and avoided ceiling.

Negative#5: Delay in Law Making

State governments took lot of time to pass the land ceiling legislation.
This gave big farmers enough time to sell their excess lands, or to transfer it to their relatives and even
make benami transfers.
Landowners evicted tenants and resume cultivation by themselves (on paper) claiming they had
shifted to “E cient” farming (so the land ceiling cannot apply). But in reality they just hired
sharecroppers/landless labourers to do all the work.
Thus, by the time the ceiling legislations were in place, there were barely any holdings left above the
ceiling and consequently little surplus land became available for redistribution.
Third Five year plan also admitted this limitation.

Negative#6: History repeats

Recall that during Zamindari abolition, the Zamindars tried all tricks to resist government’s attempt. At
that time, superior tenants/rich farmers supported government (with hope of getting land)
Now as governments tried to put land ceiling on these superior tenants/rich farmers=they tried all
tricks to resist land ceiling
using their vote bank clout over political parties at state level=bills passed with lot of delay.
conniving with petty revenue o cial at village and tehsil level to transfer land to family members
and benami persons to avoid ceiling
lling imsy court cases to delay the implementation


Thus history repeated itself – those who sought land reform earlier, now became opponents of land
reforms themselves. Anyways, so far rst phase: 1947-1972, land ceiling is epicfail. Now let’s check the
second phase:

Mock Questions

1. Evaluate the Impact of land Ceiling and distribution of surplus land on rural power structure post-
independence.
2. Examine the reasons behind dismal performance of land ceiling reforms in India.
3. Write a note on the land ceiling reforms before 1972. Why were they unsuccessful?

[Land Reform] is a long topic, I’ve split it into several parts. Therefore, to get comprehensive list of all
articles, visit Mrunal.org/Polity (http://mrunal.org/polity).


 [Land Ceiling] Phase 2: After 1972- under Indira Gandhi, Uttar Pradesh failure
and Ignored Post-LPG
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Second stage: 1972 onwards

2. 34th Amendment
3. Land Ceiling: problems/ limitations/obstacles
1. #Epicfail in UttarPradesh
2. Land reform Delayed is land reform denied
3. Hardly any ‘redistribution’
4. Lack of Auxiliary Support
5. Lack of Political Mobilization
6. Lack of Administrative will
7. FYP did not give direction
8. Land fragmentation=Low GDP
9. Post-LPG: Changed priorities

Second stage: 1972 onwards

1970: Indira Gandhi says following

The land reform measures implemented have failed to match the legitimate expectations which were rst
fostered among millions of cultivators during the national movement . . . In short, we have yet to create
institutional conditions which would enable small farmers, tenants, and landless labourers to share in the
agricultural New Deal.

Soon, a conference of Chief Ministers @Delhi. They conclude:

1. Landlessness among rural poor=main cause of Naxal problem and agrarian tensions.
2. At present, Land ceiling varied anything between 10-54 acres. This has to be reduced because thanks
to High Yield Variety Seeds +intensive cropping = even small sized farms of 1-2 hectares became
economically viable. So there is no need for big ceilings.

1972: Union government gave following guidelines

1. New ceiling

type ceiling in acres

double-cropped perennially irrigated land 10-18

single-cropped land 27
 inferior dry lands 54

2. land ceiling will be applied to family (husband+wife+three children) and not on individuals
3. While distributing surplus land, rst priority to landless agricultural workers, particularly SC/ST.
4. Land owner will be compensated for his surplus land- but this compensation will be xed below
market price (so that new owner i.e. landless laborer can a ord to buy it)
5. mechanised farms, land belonging to private trusts etc. should not be given exemption from land
ceiling.

Result?

After this 1972 guideline, most states revised their land ceiling acts- except some northeastern states and
Goa which had no ceiling laws. (table just for information, may be outdated right now.)

States Ceiling xed(in hectares) States Ceiling xed(in hectares)

Andhra Pradesh 4.05 to 21.85 Madhya Pradesh 7.28 to 21.85

Bihar 6.07 to 18.21 Maharashtra 7.28 to 21.85

Gujarat 4.05 to 21.85 Orissa 4.05 to 18.21

Haryana 7.25 to 21.85 Punjab 7.00 to 20.50

Himachal 4.05 to 28.33 Rajasthan 7.28 to 70.82

J&K 3.60 to 9.20 Tamil Nadu 4.86 to 24.28

Kamataka 4.05 to 21.85 Uttar Pradesh 7.28 to 28.33

Kerala 4.86 to 6.07 West Bengal 5.00 to 7.00

But rich farmers still continued to evade the ceiling by lling court cases on imsy ground. In Andhra
Pradesh alone ~500,000 pending cases pertaining to land ceiling were led!

34th Amendment
Since rich farmers continued to evade land ceiling by imsy courtcases, the Union government came
up with 34th Constitutional amendment in 1974.
This amendment put most of the revised ceiling laws (of state governments) in the Ninth Schedule of
the constitution so that they could not be challenged in the courts on constitutional grounds.
(according to Art.31B)

Result? Some progress in surplus land being redistributed, but overall results were still far from
satisfactory.
 early ~2 million acres land redistributed (but rich farmers wilfully dispersed more than 30 million
80s acre land to avoid ceilings)

1885 ~4 million acres land redistributed.

So far we’ve seen

1. what is land ceiling and why do we need land ceiling

2. land ceiling in two phases: freedom to 72 and from 72 onwards.

Now let’s check the overall positive/negative points:

Land Ceiling: problems/ limitations/obstacles

#Epicfail in UttarPradesh

1. U.P. Imposition of Land Ceiling Act was passed in 1960. The Act put the ceiling limit at 40 acres. It
de ned family in a liberal manner and allowed a large number of exemptions.
2. When ceiling came in e ect, Zamindars connived with local o cials. As a result, they kept the best
fertile land and mostly unlevel, wasteland, waterlogged or sandy/salty land was declared as surplus
and given to landless.
3. Poor Bene ciary had to face irregular power supply, absence of government tubewell, high charge of
water, etc.
4. The Village Pradhan and Lekhpal will not give Patta (possession document) to the poor, unless they
paid bribes.
5. Many poor who got land, resold it back to the original owner under Benami transections- under greed,
threats and coercion.

Thus, Land Ceiling Act hardly made an impact on the land distribution in UP. Former zamindars retained
large tracts of land and converted themselves into large landowners which did give them political power.

Land reform Delayed is land reform denied

The states took four to nine years to formulate the proposals, discuss them in the assembly and nally
pass them.
This lengthy time period was enough for the intermediaries to prepare for the eventual
implementation of the Land ceiling Act.
They registered surplus/excess land under relatives’ names and or even ctitious persons,
manipulating land records and reclassifying land under di erent heads. In short most of them
managed to evade land ceiling acts.

Hardly any ‘redistribution’

Overall, the land which has been declared surplus and distributed among landless= less than 2
percent of the total cultivated land.
Hence, we cannot say land ceiling was a game changer.
But only positive thing= It prevented further concentration of land in the hands of few rich people.
In other words, land ceiling didn’t change the ‘existing’ land holding pattern but merely prevented
concentration of land in few hand in the ‘future’.

Lack of Auxiliary Support

More than 6 million hectares of wastelands were distributed among the landless.
But it was #epicfail as states did not give any assistance to transform the wasteland to make it t for
cultivation.
Lack of Structural changes @village (education, transport, healthcare etc.)
Many a times, even after a landless get land, he doesn’t get credit (loans) easily to buy seeds, fertilizer.
So he ‘leases’ his land to a bigger farmer and himself migrates to city in search of jobs or works as
labourer in someone else’s farm.

Lack of Political Mobilization

After Abolition of Zamindari, the superior tenants (mostly rich to middle income farmers belonging to
General/OBC group) acquired a higher social status.
They economic strength also increased because of green revolution.
Subsequently these landowners wielded great authority in rural India and bitterly opposed to a ceiling
on agricultural holdings.
They are able to have their way because political parties made no serious e orts to mobilize
small/marginal farmers or landless laborers to enlist their support in favour of ceiling and other land
reforms.

Lack of Administrative will

Mere passing a law= insu cient. It must be implemented with full vigor and e ciency.
During this era (60-70s), the small/marginal farmers or Landless labourers are not organized
politically. 73rd Amendment for Panchayati Raj is not even passed yet.
So, there was no pressure/compulsion on district-tehsil level o cials to perform e ciently. They were
corrupt and ine cient as ever.

FYP did not give direction

First Five Year Plan identi ed small and uneconomic holdings as the root cause of many di culties in
the way of agricultural development.  But still did not pay much attention to land ceiling.  Meaning,
First Plan (secretly) did not want to disturb the big farmers or land owners who were crucial to
increased agricultural growth.
Second ve year=gave the concept of ‘exempted’ categories of land (tea plantation, e ciently
managed farms etc.) and we saw how this exemption was misused.
Third and Fourth Plans=War, stoppage of aid, famine, food-insecurity, scal de cit etc. So they had
very little to say (or do) on the issue of land reforms in general and land ceiling in particular.
by the time we reach fth ve year plan (74-79) there is emergency, Indira-Hatao, Morarji trying to
hold a coalition government => land ceiling reform did not gure in priorities- be it planning, policies,
legislation or grassroot mobilization of peasants.
6th FYP onwards (80s), the focus shifts to poverty removal, self-employment, watershed etc. and land
ceiling became as obsolete to ve year planning, as Vivek Mushran, Rahul Roy and Kumar Gaurav are
for today’s Bollywood.

Land fragmentation=Low GDP

Between 85-92, number of bene ciaries increased more than the increase in area distributed=> new
bene ciaries received very tiny plots.
As generations passed- more and more land division among sons=>smaller and smaller farms=no
economies of scale, disguised unemployment, low productivity etc.
These small farmers could have stopped uneconomic farming, and picked up some nancially
rewarding non-agro job e.g. factory worker, rickshaw driver etc. But that did not happen because
other rich farmers couldn’t buy their land due to land ceiling laws.
Thus in the long run, Land ceiling killed the rural land market, and prevented land consolidation.
Economists agree that if country wants to progress from developing=>developed nation, then people
must move from agriculture to manufacturing/service sector.
But that is not happening in India. Thus, land ceiling being one of the reason why majority of
population continues to depend on agriculture.

Post-LPG: Changed priorities

Therefore, today government is more focused on industrial sector and the service sector growth, self-
employment generation type schemes.  Land reform-Land redistribution doesn’t form priority.
Whatever land redistribution was to be done, has been done by 80s. Today there is no ‘new’ land to
cultivate.  Infect, urbanization putting more pressure on existing agriculture land.
So, if you (government) want to redistribute land, there is only one way: amend land ceiling e.g. no one
can own more than 1 acre, then take away surplus land from farmers who own more than 1 acre, and
redistribute among landless.
But this policy is impractical for governments because
It’ll increase land fragmentation. Small sized farmers= lower economies of scale, mechanization
not possible=lower productivity
It’ll annoy the existing vote bank of small-medium farmers because their surplus land will be taken
away.
In short, land reform is no longer in the priority list of Government policies. Today Government gives
priority to food security, direct cash transfer, as far as rural India goes.
Mock Question:Brie y comment on the progress of ceiling on land holdings in India.
[Land Reform] is a long topic, I’ve split it down into several parts. Therefore, to get comprehensive list of
all articles, visit Mrunal.org/Polity (http://mrunal.org/polity).
 [Land Reforms] Tenancy Reform, Tenancy protection Acts in India: salient
features
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Prologue
2. Land Reform Tool #3: Tenancy Reforms
1. Element1: Landowner’s right to lease
2. Element2: Landowner’s right to Personal Cultivation
3. Element3: Tenant’s right against eviction & high rent
4. Element4: Tenant’s right to surrender
5. Element5: Tenant’s Right to ownership
6. Misc. rights to Tenants

Prologue

in the previous articles, we’ve seen:

1. Three land tenure system of the How the British had di culty learning the land Revenue system
British: Their features, of Desi Nawabs. So, they came up with Permanent settlement
implications. (Zamindari), Ryotwari and Mahalwari systems.

2. Peasant struggles for land

But the British tenure systems caused much pain and anguish
reforms in British Raj: causes
among Indian peasants and led to numerous revolts.
and consequences.

3. Land reforms, Before

After the Provincial elections of 1937, Congress ministries took
independence: by Congress
measures to protect tenant farmers. But by and large they shied
governments in Provinces, their
away from zamindari abolition.
bene ts and limitations.

4. Land reforms, After

After freedom, State Governments enacted Zamindari Abolition
independence: Abolition of
Acts. As a result erstwhile (superior) tenants became virtual
Zamindari, Reasons, Impact,
owners of their land. =>This is First tool of Land reform.
Obstacles, Limitations.

After abolition of Zamindari, the (superior) tenant farmers

became virtual owners of the land. They owned tens and
5. Ceiling on Land holdings: hundreds of acres of land. While other peasants owned
Reasons, Impact, Obstacles, hardly any land.
Limitations, Achievements So, State governments enacted land ceiling acts and
distributed surplus land to poors and landless. This is
second tool of Land reforms.

Now comes the third tool of land reforms:

Land Reform Tool #3: Tenancy Reforms

 Various State governments have passed the laws to protect the land owners and (superior+inferior)
tenants. Collectively these are called tenancy reform acts.
Such tenancy reform acts, usually have ve elements: two for land owners + three for tenants
but rst, let’s once again check the players in a tenancy system, to get a better grip over this
tenure/tenancy reform acts:

1. enforces tenancy contracts

2. Maintains law and order.
The State
Earns revenue for doing 1+2

The owner: the guy who owns land

They pay Revenue to the State.
Rich farmers, Zamindars etc. own hundreds of acres of land. Can’t cultivate it on
Owner their own.
Similarly minors, disabled, widows, soldiers, shermen may also own land but
they can’t cultivate for one reason or another.
So these people ‘lease’ their land to other farmers (tenants).

They cultivate on land leased from the ^owner.

These are hereditary tenants. Meaning they cultivate same land generation after
generation.
Superior They pay rent to the owner.
tenants They have almost the same rights as the owners.
They can sell, mortgage or rent out the land.
They cannot be evicted against their will.

Other names: tenants at will, subordinate tenants, temporary tenants,

subtenants.
They till the land leased from other tenants/owners.
Inferior They pay rent to the owners/superior tenants.
Tenants They have limited rights over the land.
They cannot sell or mortgage the land.
They can be evicted easily.

Sharecroppers= cultivate other person’s land (Owner, Superior/inferior tenant)

They get share from the produce, and remaining goes to the tenant/owner.
Share The equipment and inputs items may be provided owner/tenant
croppers They have no rights whatsoever on the land.
They cannot sell, rent or mortgage the land.
Can be evicted easily.

Landless 1. They get paid in cash or kind by the owners (or tenants)
laborers 2. Sometimes work under begari/bonded labour.

Tenancy reform acts by and large protect only superior and inferior tenant. Sharecroppers/Laborers get
nothing. Anyways, let’s check the salient features of such Acts in various states:
 (http://mrunal.org/wp-

content/uploads/2013/11/Tenant-farmers.jpg)

Element1: Landowner’s right to lease

You own land, but you don’t have the time/money/mood/intention to cultivate by yourself. So you
lease it to another farmer and extract ‘rent’ from him (=25-30-40-60-75% of the produce).
This Land leasing, again leads to system of Intermediaries (middlemen who don’t cultivate) and
exploitation of tenants (farmers who actually cultivate).
Therefore, in an egalitarian/socialist/communist society: Agri.land leasing=undesirable.
But what is the land owner is a defense personnel, widow, minor, student or physically disabled
person – they cannot cultivate land by themselves.
Hence, leasing is permitted in such exceptional categories of land owners.

Let’s check some examples

Tenancy
Reform Act Provisions (may be outdated)
in

Two types of leasing are practiced.

Andhra In the Andhra region: leasing is permitted

In Telengana region: large landholdings cannot be leased, but small holdings can be
leased

Land can be leased in futureBut sub-leasing forbidden. (meaning tenant cannot lease
Assam
the land further to third party)
 In Future, agri.land cannot be leased except when owner is a person with disabilities.
Bihar Sub-leasing forbidden in any case
sub-lessee does not acquire the right of occupancy of the land.

Gujarat Leasing is prohibited except for Defense personnel.

Haryana Leasing permitted.

Agri land cannot be leased. Except when landowner is a minor or unmarried or a widow
Himachal
or divorcee or disabled or defense personnel.

Karnataka Agri.Land cannot be leased except when landowner is seaman or soldier.

Madhya No ban on future lease, but all the past leases have been abolished- to remove the
Pradesh nuisance of Zamindar/Jagirdar in Malwa, Gwalior, Indore and Vindhya Pradesh

Orissa Doesn’t allow leasing or sub leasing of land

yes, owner can lease the land to Tenant (5 years)Tenant can further lease the land to
Rajasthan
sub-tenant (1 year)

Uttar Agri. cannot be leased. Except when landowners are widows, unmarried women,
Pradesh military persons, students and disabled persons.

West
Leasing is prohibited, but share-cropping is allowed with some restrictions.
Bengal

Element2: Landowner’s right to Personal Cultivation

As we saw in Element#1:  Many states permit agri.land leasing (at least when landowner is a soldiers,
widows, minor, physically disabled).
But what if landowner himself wants resume cultivation later on? e.g. soldier comes back to village
after retirement, or the minor student becomes an adult, or the widow gets remarried.
Therefore laws permit the landowner to takeback the land from the tenant, IF he (landowner) wants to
resume personal cultivation. let’s check:

Can Landowner take back land from

State Law
Tenant, for personal cultivation?

Yes but not more than 75% of the

Andhra
leased land.

50% of landholding or 5 acre,

Bihar
whichever is less

50% of landholding or 2.5 acre,

Bengal
whichever is less

Kerala, Orissa, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra, Yes but not more than 50% of the
Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, Manipur, Tripura leased land.
 No, landowners cannot take back land
Uttar Pradesh
for personal cultivation

So far we saw two elements that protect the rights of landowner viz (1) right to lease and (2) right to
personal cultivation. Now let’s check the rights of tenants.

Element3: Tenant’s right against eviction & high rent

If landowner can evict the tenant according to his whims-fancies=>this system leads to exploitation.
Hence there should be xed term and xed rent.
Meaning as long as the teant is within that xyz years lease limit and keeps paying that xyz amount of
rent, you (landowner) cannot evict him.

Tenure security

Insecurity of tenure is a big hurdle in the improvement of agriculture. Tenant pays little attention to
the soil improvement, digging of well or tube-well and construction of embankment etc. This
negatively a ects agro productivity.
Security of tenure is must for social justice as well.
Hence, Most state made laws to  provide at least 5 years tenure security.
(meaning once you lease your agri-land, you cannot take it back within 5 years- except for personal
cultivation as we saw in element #2. but even there, you can only take back ~50%  of land for personal
cultivation.) Anyways, let’s check with examples:

Landowner cannot evacuate tenant, IF that tenant has been tilling the land for 3 years or
Assam
more.

A tenant could not be removed from a minimum area of 1.2 acres of the land, until he is
Manipur
given an alternative land.

tenants who is lawfully cultivating any land cannot be removed.Fixed tenure for half of
Orissa
the area held by Tenant

yes, to both tenants and sub-tenants are given term security: (5 years and 1 year
respectively)
Rajasthan
But tenant can be removed from the land if he fails to pay rent for two years or more
OR if he transfers holdings to third party without permission OR damages the land.

Landowner cannot evict the tenant except

Tamilnadu
1. If he wants to resume personal cultivation.
2. tenant is not paying rent
 tenant and Sharecroppers (bargadars) cannot be evicted, except

West
They stop cultivating land.
Bengal
They lease the same land to third party.
They refuse to give share/rent to the owner

Rent Security

During British Raj, there was no law to protect farmers against high rents. The Zamindar/ landowner
used to determine rent according to their discretion. Often, rent would be ~50-70% of the total
produce.
Result? Tenant farmer has hardly any surplus income left=>can’t buy hybrid seeds, fertilizers,
pesticides, machinery, in short he cannot invest in agri.improvement.
Therefore, after freedom, most state government passed laws to x maximum rent in the range of 25-
33% of the produce.

maximum rent that an owner can charge

state
from tenant

Punjab, Haryana, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh

33-40% of the gross agri.produce
(coastal areas)

remaining states 20-25%

Additionally, if a tenant cannot pay rent on time, the landlord cannot approach court to get his cattle,
farm-tools and standing crops. (In other words, tenant given protection against attachment even if he
defaults on rent payment.)

Limitation: Although states had xed Maximum rent in 20-50% range, but in most cases, the tenants had
to pay rent in the range of 50-70%- especially in the areas with high productivity under green revolution.
Corrupt District o cials failed to enforce the rent limits.

6th Five year plan suggested the state governments to pass laws to bring down rents to ensure rents are
not above 33% of the produce.

Operation Barga

by Leftist government in West Bengal

In the late 70s. Provided following
registration of Sharecroppers (known as Bargadar)
Fixed rent: 25% of the produce. Meaning landowner (Jotedar) can only get 25% or 1/4th of the produce.
While Sharecropper (Bargadar) gets 75% or 3/4th of the produce.
gave security of tenure: permanent and heritable
 Element4: Tenant’s right to surrender

Ok so far, tenant is given term-security (you cannot evict him before xyz years) and rent security (you
cannot charge beyond xyz% of the produce).
But what if tenant himself wants to stop farming on that land. For example,
a. he bought his own land at a di erent place, or
b. his son gets a decent job in the city and asks him to relocate or
c. He joins politics and becomes a telecom/coal minister to mint truckload of cash.
Therefore, most state laws also allow the tenant to voluntarily surrender the land back to the original
owner.
Challenge: Sometimes landowner might use bullying/coercion/gun-power to make tenant sign
stamppapers declaring his surrender.
Solution: Some states also have ‘veri cation’ procedure. e.g. in Andhra, after Tenant surrenders the
land to owner, the Tehsildar will verify whether surrender was genuine or not. But then again- thinking
in Bollywood terms: evil Landowner might kidnap Tenant’s family and order him not to complaint to
Tehsildar.
4th Five year plan recommended: the Land Voluntarily surrendered by a tenant =>should goto state
government and then state government should allot it to eligible poors. But very few states
implemented this recommendation

So far we’ve learned

1. Owner’s right to lease

2. Owner’s right to personal cultivation
3. tenant’s right against eviction
4. tenant’s right to surrender

Now to the fth and nal element under Land Tenancy reform acts:

Element5: Tenant’s Right to ownership

Many state laws permit tenant to acquire the land IF he pays 10-20-50times the annual rent to the
landowner. Let’s check:

States that permitted tenants to acquire land Bombay (now Mahrashtra+Gujarat), Uttar Pradesh,
after paying money to original landlord Madhya Pradesh, Hyderabad, Mysore and Delhi

States that permitted tenants to acquire land Assam, West Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, Bhopal and
without paying money to original landlord Vindhya Pradesh

States reduced rent of the tenants without Andhra, Madras, Rajasthan, Saurashtra, Madhya
giving them ownership rights Bharat, Hyderabad (jagir areas) and Ajmer
Let’s check some speci c provisions of Tenant’s right to acquire/purchase land

Andhra Tenant can buy after paying 8 times the annual rent.

If Tenant cultivated the land continuously for 12 years, can acquire right of
occupancy from the landowners
Bihar without paying money to original landlord.
Limitation: Many small farmers had been tilling land on ‘oral agreements’, did not
have paper records to prove 12 years.

Tenant has right to buy land, if he had been tilling continuously for 1 year. But he has
Gujarat to pay to owner. In 1975, Gujarat ~0.8 out of 1.3 million tenants got ownership rights
after paying to their respective land owners. (=more than 50% of tenants bene t)

Madhya
Yes, if tenant pays 15 times the annual rent to the owner.
Pradesh

Tenant has right to purchase land within one year of the commencement of
tenancy.
in 1975, ~1.1 out of  ~2.6 million tenants acquired ownership rights. (=less than
Maharashtra
50%)
Challenge: Many tenants could not a ord the large sum of money to purchase the
land.

Manipur yes, if tenant pays 30 times the annual rent to owner

Orissa Yes, if tenant pays 10 times the annual rent to the owner.

Government Abolished intermediaries but did not facilitate tenants to purchase land
Tamilnadu
from the landlord.

Limitation of Right to ownership:

In above examples, we saw how ~50% of tenants in Gujarat and Maharahstra, got ownership rights after
paying to landowner. But why didn’t every tenant bought land from his land owner? Because:

1. State laws already gave rent reduction + permanent occupancy rights= these superior tenants were
for all practical purposes virtual owners.
2. Hence there was hardly any motivation to try and acquire full ownership.
3. Besides to get full ownership=> need capital (money) and legal complications.

Misc. rights to Tenants

Some states also made laws for:

1. Compensation for tenant, if he made permanent improvements to the land such as, digging of well,
planting of trees, construction of farm house, embankment, etc.
 2. During natural disaster/ ood/drought etc. if government remits land-revenue to the landlord, the
latter too will have to remit rent to the cultivator.
3. Landlord cannot receive gift from the tenant and cannot ask tenant to provide him free services. (In
other words, Begari removed, Art.23)

In the next article, we’ll see the achievements and limitations of Tenancy reforms undertaken in India.
 [Tenancy Reforms] Achievements and Limitations in India
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Tenancy Reforms: Obstacles/Limitations

1. #1: Women did not bene t
2. #2: SC/ST did not bene t
3. #3: Green Revolution=land grabbing
4. #4: Personal Cultivation
2. Tenancy Reforms: Bene ts
1. #1: Rise of New Politics
2. #2: Social Justice
3. #3: More investment

Tenancy Reforms: Obstacles/Limitations

In the previous article, we saw the salient features of Tenancy reforms in various states of India, now let’s
check their achievements and limitations.

1. Land reform delayed, is land reform denied: The inordinate delays in law making=>Landowners
evicted potential bene ciaries (tenants) before the law came into force.
2. Underground: These laws pushed tenancy to underground = in concealed form, through oral
agreements without anything on paper. The tenants were now called ‘farm servants’ though they
continued to work in exactly the same status.
3. Oral: Most tenancy agreements were oral and informal, hence tenants could not prove anything in
court to assert their rights.
4. Creamy Layer: Didn’t provide security to tenure to all tenants. Only the upper stratum of the farmers
– who had the knowledge and means to ght court cases, bene ted from these laws.
5. Sharecroppers did not bene t: In many state laws, Sharecroppers don’t enjoy same rights as a
tenant. Therefore, landowners converted tenants into sharecroppers.

#1: Women did not bene t

Women in India have traditionally been deprived of property rights and their property rights still meet
with strong social opposition.
During the heydays of land redistribution (60-80s) – males were given the “patta” (document showing
ownership right over land). But their wives got nothing.

Result? Women have been working in farmland without any title/paper documents. It leads to following
negative consequences

1. Women cannot get loan/credit, subsidy on irrigation-fertilizer-seeds etc.

 2. Women become destitute in case of desertion, divorce, or widowhood. In North India, widows often
found working as agricultural laborers on the farms of their well-o brothers or brothers-in-law.
3. Women have no bargaining power
@household decision making
@labour market for wages.

This is new form of Zamindari exploitation because farm operation (by female) is divorced from farm
ownership (by female). Thus, tenancy reforms/land reforms have failed to bring gender equity in rural
areas.

#2: SC/ST did not bene t

Recall the hierarchy of players in a tenancy system: landowner=>superior tenant =>inferior

tenant=>sharecropper=>landless laborers.
Major bene ciaries of land reform laws = superior tenant, who mostly fall in OBC category.
But impact of land reform measures on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were not signi cant.
Landowners- large, medium, small or marginal- all vehemently resisters tenancy reforms. No political
party could dare to lose their vote bank. Hence Tenancy reforms didn’t trickle down.
The rural strata at the bottom of land-ownership and caste hierarchy, continued to be exploited by the
old and new elite.

In other words, tenancy reforms merely replaced the old elite (upper caste) with new elite (Backward
castes). But have not trickled down below that.

#3: Green Revolution=land grabbing

The Green Revolution made agriculture pro table, thus led to role reversal among tenancy players.
Before=: big farmers would lease land to small farmers.
After=: big farmers would take land from small/marginal farmers on lease, and they’ll cultivate with
hybrid seeds, machines, fertilizers etc. (doubt: but why would small farmer lease his land? Because he
lacks the ‘capital’ to buy all those hybrid seeds n fertilizer- hence for a small farmer, it is less risky and
more pro table to lease land to big farmer).
But, eventually many of these big (tenant) farmers grabbed the land using loopholes in tenancy laws.
In other words, rich farmers using big capital and modern technology, have converted agriculture into
a capitalist mode of production. In such cases tenancy laws have harmed the small and marginal
farmers => Green revolution has been detrimental to land reforms.

#4: Personal Cultivation

Most State Acts allow landowners to takeback land from tenant for ‘personal cultivation’.
On paper the term ‘personal cultivation’ looked reasonable, but when applied in the eld, was
confusing and subject to multiple interpretations.
 Does personal cultivation mean he himself has to plough the eld? or can he hire a landless labourer
for ploughing and irrigation? ….. Concept was vaguely de ned, there were no de nite answers in the
various state laws.
Thus, ex-zamindars/landowners evicted the tenants from the land claiming that they (owner) intended
to cultivate the land personally.  In Punjab alone, more than 500,000 tenants were evicted in pretext of
Personal cultivation.

Some more negative points stem from bureaucratic apathy (explained in later part of this article).
Anyways, enough of negativity, let’s check some positive points:

Tenancy Reforms: Bene ts

#1: Rise of New Politics

After freedom but before land reforms (50-60s) After land reforms (60-70-80s)

Paved the way for the rise of new political

forces in the country.
Particularly Superior Tenants / Bullock
The political process dominated by the “client
Capitalists / middle Shudra castes (=Yadav,
patron model.”
Jat and Ahir)
In this model, the rural elite (upper caste) would
Tenancy reforms+Green revolution= gave
persuade or force the lower caste villagers to vote
them money power and freedom to
for their (upper caste) leader.
assert themselves politically.
Hence political parties mainly focused on pleasing
First they became a pressure group, later
those rural elite. And did not care much for
a political group
SC/ST/OBC
No government could a ord to ignore
their demands for subsidized electricity,
fertilizer, irrigation etc.

Thus we can say,

1. Land reforms helped new classes/castes to gain political power directly/indirectly.

2. The participation of the backward classes deepened Indian democracy.
3. Indian democracy became more inclusive.
4. Political system became more competitive and complex.

#2: Social Justice

Before land reforms after

 These laws gave the lower castes
the security of tenure over
farmland
Upper castes owned most of the land In Village.
+land ceiling+zamindari abolition+
While the lower castes lived as tenants and agriculture
Panchayati Raj reforms.
labourers.
Result: In uence/domination of
This Landlessness and insecure tenancies forced the
upper caste declined in village
majority of the rural population to be dependent on the
power structure
upper caste=>often lead to exploitation.
Thus, Constitution’s promise of
giving justice — social, political and
economic, became a reality.

#3: More investment

In the ryotwari areas of Bombay state (MH+Guj), ~50% of the tenants became landowners- including
inferior tenants.
Even in former zamindari areas such as West Bengal, nearly half the sharecroppers got occupancy
rights under Operation Barga.
Now the tenants and sharecroppers who got occupancy rights=> they had the motivation of becoming
progressive farmers, use high yielding variety, invest more capital etc.

So far, we learned three ‘major’ land reforms measures in post independent India

1. Zamindari abolition
2. land ceiling
3. tenure reforms

In the next article, we’ll see the overall positive and negative impact of Land reforms in India.
 [Land Reforms] Overall Achievements, Impact on Indian society & Reasons
for failure
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Land Reforms: Overall Negative

1. Jurisdiction
2. Outdated Land records
3. Problem in North East
4. Lack of budgetary $upport
5. Bureaucratic apathy
6. Lack of Votebank
7. Powerless Panchyat
8. Lack of Civil Society/NGO action
9. The Naxal Angle:
10. Appu
2. Land reforms: Overall Positive

Land Reforms: Overall Negative

In the previous articles, we discussed individual land reform initiatives, their achievements and
limitations. Now time for overall positive and negative points of the Land reform initiatives in India, by
various Governments.

Jurisdiction

‘Land’ is a State subject under the Constitution=> di erent States have evolved di erently in the
eld of land management.
The Union can play only a limited role to play in this regard. At most they can frame policy, release
funds –but implementation rests in the hands of State Government.
Some states have moved quickly by passing necessary legislations, while other states have adopted
a slower and piecemeal approach in this regard.
Consequently there are considerable variations in the results achieved by di erent states.
Even in the same state- di erent regions show di erent rate of progress.

UN report says: “In India there seems to be great inequality in di erent states regarding the land
reforms.…these land reforms are not implemented in the true spirit.”

Outdated Land records

In Ryotwari areas (Bombay State, Madras State and Assam)

 Before independence, the government directly collected land revenue from farmer. So, district
o cials kept up to date land records for purpose of assessment and collection of land Revenue.
Village Accountant (VA) had to update the entries every year.
The superiors in the hierarchy closely supervised the work of the VA.
The records showed who owned the di erent plots of land in the village, the area and boundaries
of each plot, who cultivated it, what crops were grown and how much was payable to the
government as land revenue.
But after independence, this system fell into disarray.

Permanent settlement areas & Princely states: There was no practice of the annual updating of
records.

But after independence, state government did not pay attention to land records.

Gradually In most States, villages and eld maps, records of rights and land measurement records
have become obsolete.
Tenancy reforms can only be implemented if there is proper written records of tenancies and land
ownership. This was not always available because most of the time land leased on oral agreement-
nothing on paper.

Outdated land records = land disputes, land grabbing, court cases, landowners evade ceilings=> Land
reform remains #EPICFAIL

Problem in North East

The system of land records and land administration are entirely di erent in the hilly and tribal
tracts of north-eastern States.
In some of these areas, there was no legislation regarding land and land related matters.
Therefore, accurate land records do not exist.
Jhuming or shifting cultivation is practiced. There is no record of the area or the boundaries of plots
allotted to individuals. (+ the nuisance of illegal Bangladeshi Migrant farmers)

Lack of budgetary $upport

Cost of collecting land revenue (paperwork, sta -salary, electricity etc.)= higher than the actual cash
received under land revenue.  Therefore, many states don’t even bother collecting land Revenue.
Land revenue administration falls under “non-plan” expenditure = doesn’t get much budgetary
allocation.
As a result, administration su ers because department won’t hire many o cers/employees, won’t
bother building new o ces, buying new photocopiers, GPS survey devices, jeeps etc.
In many places, Village accountants don’t have a separate o ce. Lack of photocopiers, computers=
land records not maintained properly.
 Many Tahsildars didn’t have telephones* and jeeps. So they were out of touch from day-to-day
bribery and mismanagement by patwari @village level. (*we are talking about 50-90s era, when
India had more toilets than mobile phones)
Result? Land records are outdated => land disputes, land grabbing and frequent litigations in
courts. Poor people su er.

Bureaucratic apathy

Today, many patwaris, village o cers, Mandal o cers, revenue inspectors etc.
have settled in small towns/cities with their families. They sign les from home,
run o ce through phone and rarely visit the villages.
They write inquire reports without doing spot inspections in village.
o cers live
Villagers have to visit town to get their problem resolved=costly a air.
in cities
Land ma a and rich farmers get things done by paying bribes.
WB: In West Bengal there are no Village Accountants. The Circle Inspector is the
functionary of the Land Administration Department at the lowest level. People
have to go to his o ce for various purposes.

Revenue o cers are trained better in court procedures than in dispute-

resolution in a humane manner.
bogus Hence they give more emphasis on form rather than content, on letter rather
training than spirit.
They rely on documents, stamp papers, a davits but don’t bother to make eld
visit, talk with people to nd the ground reality.

Today, District o cers (namely DM & SDM) mainly focused on

Conversion of Agri-land into industrial land

SEZ/industrialization related matter
Changed
law and order maintenance
focus
How to chow down money from MNREGA, IAY etc. (or prevent it)

Hence, land reform programs=low priority for senior o cers @District level. They
tend to ignore the Tehsildar/Patwari’s ine ciency/corruption.

Because of above reasons: a villager cannot get problem solved through

village/tehsil level o cer. He has to approach the court. But

1. Majority of revenue courts continue to function in English language, but villagers

Tarikh pe don’t know English.
Tarik 2. Revenue Courts already choked with thousands of cases related to land. Poor
litigant cannot a ord making trips and hiring lawyers

Result? In most cases poor litigant will compromise with the land ma a/rich
farmer/ex-zamindar or just stop pursuing the matter.

Many state departments keep their own land-database e.g. Agriculture, drinking
no
water, irrigation, animal husbandry, forest etc.  But there is no linkage amongst
coordination
these di erent data base.
In short, land reform= low priority for state government. All the new initiatives (Computerization of
records, Forest rights Act have come from Union.)

Lack of Votebank

(From 50-90s)

Target audience for land reforms= tenants, landless agricultural labourers, SC/ST. But they were
largely unorganized (Except WB and Kerala). They were unable to bring required pressure on the
government for speedy implementation of the land reforms.
For political workers at grassroots are indi erent to land reforms because it was easy to sway the
ignorant voters on desired political line according to religion and caste. The Ignorance, poverty,
illiteracy and inegalitarian system has favoured such petty politics.
Therefore land reform was more of a rhetoric rather than real agenda of governments.

Powerless Panchyat

Panchayats don’t have su cient revenue sources of their own.

Money ow: Centrally sponsored schemes (named after you know who)=>DRDA+Line deparments
@State government=>Panchayat.
Result? Panchayats are too weak to do anything about land reforms.  + The proxy in uence of rural
elites stonewall any land reform initiatives.

Lack of Civil Society/NGO action

In the noteworthy movements by civil society/NGO for land reforms= Bhoodan/Gramdan, land
satyagraha etc. But all these things happened before 90s. Today civil society/NGOs very vocal about
transparency, anti-corruption, anti-rape laws, nuclear projects, mining rights etc. but land reforms
hardly get any attention. Why?

1. It is easy to get national-international awards/funding, media-recognition, political attention in

these new topics.
2. Just like “secularism”, the “land distribution” also has lost its original meaning. So, if an NGO talks
too much about land redistribution- he might be labelled as naxal-sympethizer.
3. In land reform sector: (1) computerization of land records=done by district administration and (2)
for forest rights act=>done through gram Sabha. So Jholachhap NGOs don’t see opportunities for
getting government projects/funds to mint ca$h, unlike in the schemes for under HIV/child-
labour/education/SHG type activities.

The Naxal Angle:

The present Left wing extremism (LWE) has roots at two places:
 West Bengal (1967) @Naxalbari

Andhra (1949) @Telengana and @Srikakulam.

At that time, main cause of these movement = exploitation by zamindar/landlords/forest contractors.

But In the heydays of naxal movement, focus of the state governments shifted from agrarian/land
reforms to law and order preservation. As a result:

1. Many villagers remained landless.

2. Rise of upper caste militia/private armies like Ranvir Sena, Kunwar Sena etc.
3. Within village, Lack of growth in non-agricultural sector.
4. Tribal land alienation by mining ma a.

All these factors further helped the Maoists to recruit more cadres from villages. District o cials don’t
goto Maoist a ected areas, look @all villagers with suspicion etc.etc.etc. Ultimately, land reform cannot
be carried out.

Thus, Left wing extremism (LWE) and Lack of Land Reform (LLR) have formed a vicious cycle.

Appu

Task Force on Agrarian Relations set up by the Planning Commission headed by P. S. Appu. (1972
)Made following observations

1. Lack of political will=no tangible progress

2. The decentralization of power to the rural sector was seen by the politicians as a threat to their
national prominence.
3. The erstwhile superior tenants belonging mostly to the upper and middle castes have bene ttd.
4. (but) A majority of the agricultural laborers =politically unorganized=could not bene t from the land
reform measures.
5. Land reform Acts were poorly drafting= many loopholes and litigations.
6. Land records were outdated, most states didnot bother updating.
7. Five year plans only gave lip service for land reforms but didn’t allot signi cant funds.
8. Land reform has practically disappeared from the agenda of most political parties. but This is an
inevitable consequence of the far reaching changes that have taken place in social and economic
elds;

Land reforms: Overall Positive

1. abolished exploitative the land tenure systems prevalent in agrarian society
2. Distributed the surplus land among the landless and the weaker sections of the society.
 3. Provided security of tenure i.e. the tenants are assured that they can cultivate the land for long
time period.
4. In some cases tenants even given ownership rights.
5. xed rent in the range of 25-33%
6. Without use of violence.
7. The cumulative e ect of abolition of zamindari, tenancy legislation and ceiling legislation=
motivated the cultivators to invest and improve agricultural practices.
8. Even though these land reforms were met with limited success, they made a signi cant positive
impact on poverty removal.
9. Land reforms+ Sanskritization + democratization + Panchayati Raj= lower castes have become
more organized and assertive about their rights.
10. In areas where land reform has not been implemented, the inequalities have persisted, caste
oppression is most acute and have generally experienced low socio-economic development. (In
other words where Land reforms were properly implemented- inequality is less, caste oppression is
less and socio-economic Development is better).
11. Historically unique e ort at transformation of agrarian relations within a democratic framework.
12. Brought fundamental changes in the agrarian economy, rural social structure, and rural power
structure. Moved India society towards the egalitarian society.
13. Increased democratization of Indian polity and reduction in in uence of the dominant sections of
the society. Counter-argument: Impact was not so signi cant like China/USSR.

To sum up, Land reforms are a major instruments of social transformation in a backward economy
based on feudal and semi-feudal productive relationships. But in India, they met with limited success
mainly because of the political and bureaucratic apathy.

Mock Questions
1. Analyze the role of tenancy reform laws as a measure of land reforms.
2. Write a note on the measures taken by states to provide security of tenure to farmers.
3. Land reforms in early decades after independence, have failed to bring gender equity in rural
power structure. Elaborate.
4. Critically examine the Green revolution as a reason for non-inclusive growth in rural India.
5. The blame for partial success of land reforms squarely falls on the local bureaucracy. Comment.
6. Only the upper stratum of the peasants have bene ted from the land reforms. For the Landless,
land reform remains an ‘un nished business’.
7. Evaluate the impact of Land reforms measures by the state governments in the early decades after
independence.
8. Discuss, in brief, the contributions of land reforms in rural development.
9. Critically examine the impact of land reforms on Indian economy and society.
10. Critically examine the impact of social, economic and political power structure on land reforms in
rural India.
 [Land Reforms] Bhoodan, Gramdan, Vinoba Bhave: Achievements, obstacles,
limitations
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Prologue
2. Bhoodan Movement (Donation of Land)
1. Bhoodan: Mechanism/procedure/features
2. Bhoodan: Positive
3. Bhoodan: Obstacles, Limitations, Problems
3. Gramdan (Donation of the Entire Village)
1. Gramdan: Concept/Principles
2. Gramdan Mechanism
3. Gramdan: Bene ts
4. Pardi Satyagraha, Gujarat, 50s
5. Mock Questions

Prologue

So far we’ve seen: British Tenure system, peasant revolts and three main land reforms after
independence viz. (1) Zamindari Abolition (2) Land ceiling (3) Tenancy protection Acts.
In this article, we’ll check some people’s/NGO/Civil society movements for land reforms in India. Their
achievements/limitations. by the Naxalbari related matter ignored here. You’ll nd neat coverage ot it
under September competition under internal security folder click me  
(https://docs.google.com/ le/d/0B0DPgaYAtDgmQUNCLXgtYzR6VUU/edit?usp=sharing)
In the next article we’ll come back to government actions: cooperative farming, consolidation of land
holdings and computerization of records.


 (http://mrunal.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Timeline-Bhoodan-Gramdan.png)
TIMELINE: CIVIL SOCIETY / NGO MOVEMENTS FOR LAND REFORMS AFTER INDEPENDENCE

Bhoodan Movement (Donation of Land)

First Bhoodan in village Pochampalli, Nalgonda District, Andhra (the hotbed of Telengana
1951
movement)By local Zamindar V. Ramchandra Reddy to Vinoba Bhave.

1953 Jayaprakash Narayan withdrew from active politics to join the Bhoodan movement

Bhoodan movement had two components:

1. Collect land as gift from zamindars and rich farmers.

2. Redistribute that gifted/donated land among the landless farmers.

Bhoodan: Mechanism/procedure/features

1. (Hierarchy) Vinoba: Sarvodaya Samaj=> Pradesh Bhoodan Committees in each region=> local
committees and individual social workers @grassroot.
2. He and his followers were to do padayatra (walk on foot from village to village). Persuade the larger
landowners to donate at least one-sixth of their lands.
3. Target= 50 million acres. (~1/6 of total cultivable land in India)
4. When a Zamindar/rich farmer gifts/donates a land, the Bhoodan worker would prepare a deed.

 5. These Deeds forwarded to Vinoba Bhave @Sevagram for signature.
6. Bhoodan Worker took help of Gram Panchayat, PAtwari (village accountant) to survey the bene ciaries
and land fertility.
7. First preference given to landless agricultural laborers, then to farmers with insu cient land.
8. A date was xed, entire village gathered and the bene ciary family was given land.
9. Those who receive the donation are asked to sign a printed application requesting for land, after
which they are presented with certi cates of having received land.
10. No fees charged from the bene ciary.
11. Bene ciary was expected to cultivate the land for atleast 10 years. He should start within three years
of the receipt of land.
12. These Rules/procedures were relaxed by taking local conditions, cultures in account.

Many state governments made legislation to facilitate donation and distribution of Bhoodan land.
Example: Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan,
U.P., Delhi and Himachal Pradesh.

Subsequently, the movement was widened into Gramdan. States again passed special legislation for
management of Gramdan villages.

Bhoodan: Positive

In the initial years the movement achieved a considerable degree of success, especially in North India-
UP, Bihar.
By 1956: receiving over 4 million acres of land as donation.
By 1957: ~4.5 million acres.
The movement was popularised in the belief that land is a gift of nature and it belonged to all.
The donors of land are not given any compensation. This movement helped to reduce the gap in
haves and have-nots in rural areas.
This movement was un-o cial. The landlords were under no compulsion to donate their land, it was a
voluntary movement.  One of the very few attempts after independence to bring about land reform
through a movement
Promoted the Gandhian the idea of trusteeship or that all land belonged to God.
Communist leader E.M.S. Namboodiripad
the Bhoodan and Gramdan movement stimulated political and other activity by the peasant
masses
has created a favourable atmosphere for political propaganda and agitation
for redistribution of the land
for abolition of private ownership of land
for the development of agricultural producers’ cooperatives.

Bhoodan: Obstacles, Limitations, Problems 

 After ’56 movement lost its momentum.
While nearly 4.5 million acres of Bhoodan land was available- barely 6.5 lakh acres
was actually distributed among 200,000 families (1957)
Slow progress In some cases the donors took back their land from the Bhoodan workers for
certain reasons.
This created doubts in the minds of some people about the continuity of the
movement.

village leaders, or allotting authorities, demanded money from the poor for
Bribes recommending their names for allotment. As a result, many underserving villagers
also got land e.g those already having land/ those involved in trade-commerce.

Bhoodan movement created land hunger among landless.Some of them applied

Greed
multiple times in the name of wives, children etc. to get more and more free land.

Donating big landlords donated those land which were un t for cultivation (or under court
bogus land litigation). Such donations served no real purpose.

Sometimes Bhoodan workers would even accept disputed land as gift. Without
veri cation.
Disputed land
Later the Matter would be stuck in court litigations and bene ciary would get
nothing.

In the later phase, Bhoodan workers got associated with one or another political
parties. Some of them tried to ‘use’ the Bhoodan organization as a means to gain
Politicization political clout and dividends at the time of election.
Thus as the years passed, Bhoodan workers lost credibility and respect among
villagers=>land gifts declined.

Since Bhoodan workers became political agents, Some landlords / Ex-Zamindars

donated land as ‘bribe’ to Bhoodan workers- with hope of getting favourable
Bribes returns e.g. ticket in local election, road-contracts, building contracts etc.
And if they (landlords) were not given such favours- they’d forcibly take back the
Bhoodan land from the bene ciary later on.

Mere allotment of land=insu cient. Because landless farmer also needed seeds,
Support fertilizer, irrigation etc.
Often the bene ciary couldn’t arrange loans for these inputs.

District o cials were slow and ine cient in nishing the formalities of Bhoodan
bureaucratic land transfers.
apathy donated land remained idle for a number of years and the revenue for it had to
be paid by the donor.

1. The average size of land given to bene ciary=0.5 to 3 acres.

Fragmentation 2. Result: land fragmentation + diseconomies of scale + ‘disguised unemployment’
without any noticeable rise in agro-production.

3. Bhoodan’s main purpose was to ‘serve as a brake on the revolutionary struggle of

Marxist
the peasants’
Criticism
4. Thus idea of Bhoodan= reactionary, class collaborationist.


 5. Bhoodan based on Gandhian idea of trusteeship. Some Socialists wanted this
movement to realize the potential of trusteeship and launch mass civil
Missed the disobedience against injustice.
bigger picture 6. The Sarvodaya Samaj, however, on the whole failed to make this transition: to
build an active large-scale mass movement that would generate irresistible
pressure for social transformation in large parts of the country.

All these loopholes, slowly and steadily, made the movement dysfunctional.
1999: Bihar government dissolved the State Bhoodan Committee for its inability to distribute even half
the Bhoodan land available over the past thirty-eight years.
Thus, Vinoba’s lofty ideal remained more as a philosophy and was never realized fully.

Gramdan (Donation of the Entire Village)

First Gramdan 1952: by the village of Mongroth in U.P.1955: Orissa, Koratpur district.

At a later phase, this progamme was extended to other states in Bihar, Maharashtra, Assam, Andhra
Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Kerala.

Gramdan: Concept/Principles

1. Gramdan may be de ned as an experiment in collective village living.

2. Original idea comes from Gandhi’s reply to Jamnalal Bajaj: “it is far better for a hundred families in a
village to cultivate their land collectively and divide the income therefrom than to divide the land any how
into a hundred portions”.
3. Vinoba Bhave popularized ^this concept of Gandhi.

Gramdan Mechanism

The villagers have to sign a declaration saying, “We are vesting the ownership of all our land to the “Gram
Sabha” of the village.

1. This Gram Sabha/ Village council will unanimously nominate ten to fteen persons who will form an
executive Committee.
2. This executive Committee will be responsible for the day-to-day administration of the village.
3. The decisions of the Committee will be rati ed by the Council.

In other words, Gramdan=A Gram Sabha like institution collectively owned and managed entire
land/farms of the villagers.

Gramdan: Bene ts

1. In an ideal gramdan village, there will be no landowners, and no absentee landlords.


 2. The labourers will give all their earnings to the village community, which will then distribute it
according to needs.
3. Thus, gramdan acts as the ideal unit for putting the principles in the practice, “From each according to
his ability, to each according to his needs”.

By 1960 Approx.Gramdan Villages

Orissa 1900+

MH 600

Kerala 550

Andhra 480+

Madras 250

Gramdan movement was considered superior to the Bhoodan movement because:

BHOODAN GRAMDAN

land fragmentation, ine cient cultivation, distribution of

poverty, decline in marketable surplus , donation of
Nope
uncultivable land, legal and other di culties of redistribution,
etc.

Nope Economies of scale

Sarvodaya of entire village. Everyone

Bene ts only the person who gets the land
bene ts.

possible to correlate with

economic planning in the
country.
Nope 2nd FYP recognized that
Gramdan village have great
signi cance for co-operative
village development.

Limitation of Gramdan? Gramdan was successful mainly in villages where class di erentiation had not
yet emerged and there was little if any disparity in ownership of land or other property. E.g. Tribal villages.
But didn’t nd cooperation from other villages in the plains or villages near urban centers.

Pardi Satyagraha, Gujarat, 50s

1. Socialist workers: Iswarbhai Desai, Ashok Mehta.

WHO 2. Kisan Panchayat: a non-political body with no a liation to any political party.
3. Tribals from Pardi and Dharmpur Taluka

 WHEN 1953-1967

Why?

1. 75% of the agro land was owned by 100 big landlords.

2. These landlords were not interested in farming. They kept the land as such- so grass automatically
grew and sold pro tably in Bombay fodder trade.
3. Local tribals would get labour work in such ‘fodder-farms’ for only 1-2 months during harvesting. They
remained jobless and starving for remaining months. While the landlords made decent pro t with
almost none investment or e orts.

OBJECTIVES/FEATURES/ACTION:

Redistribution of land was not on their agenda. (Themselves declared it)

Satyagrahi would enter in the private land and start tilling to grow foodcrops and court arrest.
Tribals to boycott grass cutting work. even outside labour would not be allowed do the work.
Picketing. As a result, the grass dried up at many places.
With time, movement found support from public and political parties
Bhoodan and Gramdan movements also started but failed thanks to poor response from landlords.

Result? Almost #EPICFAIL because:

1. 1960, Gujarat created out of Bombay state. New state government made some promises=>Iswarbhai
and other Satyagrahi joined the Congress party. Hence momentum/pressure was lost.
2. 1965: War between India Pakistan. The CM (Balwant Rai Mehta) died in plane crash. New CM (Hitendra
Desai) did not show much interest in ful lling promises made by previous CM.
3. Landlords went to Gujarat Highcourt court. Although HC rejected their plea, but state government did
not show any urgency to implement the agreements.
4. 1966: Ishwarbhai Desai decide to quit congress and launch a new Satyagraha, but he died. And others
were unable to provide e ective leadership/direction to the movement.
5. 1967: A new agreement between the government, the landlords and the Satyagrahis. But the
implementation carried out at a snail’s pace.

Mock Questions

12/15m

1. Critically examine the philosophy, the concept and the working of Bhoodan and Gramdan movements
in India.
2. It is far better for a hundred families in a village to cultivate their land collectively and divide the
income therefrom than to divide the land any how into a hundred portions. Comment.

3. Write a note on the Lacunae in Bhoodan and Gramdan Movements.
4. Bhoodan was an experiment in Gandhian idea of trusteeship. Comment.
5. Evaluate the impact of Bhoodan and Gramdan movements as measures of land reforms. In what way
Gramdan was superior to Bhoodan movement?
6. Discuss the signi cant movements initiated by people for land reforms in India after independence.
7. critically evaluate non-governmental initiatives in the area of land reform


 [Land Reforms] Land Satyagraha & other Civil Society movements in India
during 70s and 80s
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Great Land Struggle, 1970s

2. Land for Tillers Freedom (LAFTI), Tamil Nadu, 80s
3. Land Satyagraha, Chattisgarh, late 80s

Great Land Struggle, 1970s

WHEN 1970s

Bhartiya Khet Mazdoor Union, All India Kisan Sabha and Communist Party of India
Nearly 15 lakh agricultural workers, poor peasants, the tribals, workers and the poor from
WHO? the towns
Trade unions and students, the youth and the women’s organizations came forward and
directly participated in the struggle.

TYPE militant mass movement

 to highlight the fact that land is concentrated in the hands of a few landlords, former
WHY? princess, zamindars and monopolists and to alert public attention to the urgent need for
radical agrarian reforms.

OBJECTIVES/ACTIONS

1. Occupy the government lands, forest lands, the land belonging to landlords, monopolist, black
marketeers.
2. Start cultivating on ^above land
3. Landless ght for full ownership of land
4. Tenants ght to reduce rent
5. Tribals ght for tribal land grabbed by forest contractors and moneylenders from the plains.
6. Urban poors ght for vacant land for housing
7. Everyone ght to get radical amendments to the present ceiling laws and distribution of surplus land.

TWO PHASES:

PHASE What Who?

JULY, Occupying government land and forest all the states, except Andhra Pradesh, Tamil
1970 land Nadu, Manipur and J & K,


 Occupying huge farms of landlords,
AUGUST, all states, except Assam (due to heavy ood) and
former princes, Monopolists like Birlas
1970 Kerala (due to Mid-term election) participated.
etc.

Overall, More than 2 lakh acres of land was occupied, more than lakhs of people arrested.

OUTCOMES

1. While Bhoodan movement silently faded away from public memory and political arena silently, but the
great land Satyagraha, created ripples in the public mind and ruling party.
2. Before the land struggle, the Union and the state governments never felt the urgency of solving the
land problem. But now, Every state government came out with gures & plans to distribute wasteland
among the poor.
3. For the rst time, land distribution started in actual practice, and some landless people got Pattas of
land.
4. Birlas were exposed as the biggest land grabber of India. Their farms in Uttaranchal and Punjab were
distributed to farm labourers.
5. Government appointed Central Land Reform Committee to address agrarian inequalities in the
country.

Land for Tillers Freedom (LAFTI), Tamil Nadu, 80s

LAFTI was founded by Krishnammal and her husband Jagannathan in 1981.

Features/Actions by LAFTI

1. Earlier we saw how rich farmers in Tamilnadu transfereed their land to fake trusts/charitable
organizations/ schools, hospitals and dharrnashalas to avoid land ceiling.
2. LAFTI organized people against such illegal holdings and pleaded government to takeover such land
and redistribute it among the landless poor.
3. Highlighted the loopholes in the land related acts. LAFTI petitioned the President of India about the
weaknesses in the Benami transection ordinance and how landlords evaded ceilings.
4. Negotiated with banks and landlords for a reasonable price for the purchase of land. And then
redistributed it among landless.
5. Generally, the nationalized bank charged a high rate of interest (14%) for o ering loan for the land
transfer projects. LAFTI appealed to the government of India to reduce interest rate to 4%.
6. Requested government to waive stamp-duty and registration fees for transferring land to landless.
7. Started its own banking scheme, titled “LAFTI Land Bank”, by involving 10000 landless families. These
10000 people deposited. Re. 1 per day or Rs. 10 per week or Rs. 500 per year for ve years.
8. With this money and help from the government in the form of exemption of stamp duties and
registration fees, LAFTI planned to transfer 500 acres of land per year to the landless families.

 Land Satyagraha, Chattisgarh, late 80s

CAUSES/REASONS:

1. Land ceiling act were not implemented because nexus between the land ma a, landlords,
bureaucrats, politicians.
2. Under government’s land distribution schemes- the landless were provided with Pattas (land
ownership document) but landma as / rich farmers / forest contractors did not allow them to
physically occupy the land.
3. State Government made it mandatory for all the landlords to give back tribal land to the tribals. But
these landlords would appeal in higher courts and matter kept pending for years.
4. The tribals lacked the money and means to ght such legal battles. State government didn’t come to
their help.
5. Most of the landless were SC/ST. They were forcibly pushed out of their ancestral land, working as
bonded labour because of indebtedness to the rich landlords or village traders.
6. By 1980’s, there were 4000 bonded labourers in Raipur district alone.

PROGRESS/RESULT:

1988: Land Satyagraha launched in Raipur district. Spearheaded by bonded labours

Slogan Action

Zamin Ka Faisla, Zamin

Staging dharnas (sit-ins), hunger strikes on the disputed land.
Par Hoga (All land issues
All the concerned o cials, including from police to Patwari, Tehsildar
will be settled on the land
to magistrate should come the disputed land and settle the matter.
itself).

Peasants would court arrest and go to jail in a peaceful manner.

Zamin Do Ya Jail Do” (give 1993: thousands of villages courted arrest
us land or imprisonment). Finally government o cials refused to arrest people as there was no
room left in Jails.

Chakka-Jam Blocking tra c on the mains roads.

directly plough the elds with or without government intervention.

At almost all the places, the poor, landless, and small farmers went in
“Jaun Khet man nagar large numbers with their ploughs and bullocks, to register their claim
Chalahi, wohi khet ke over the ancestral land.
malik ho” (land to the At some places people were able to register their control over the
tiller) land, whereas in other places the o cial, in connivance with the
landlords and the powerful politician, forcibly dispossessed the people
from the land.


The land Satyagraha initiated a new dimension, a new movement, among the people to take control over
their resources.
Mock Question: Explain the four signi cant outcomes of the great land struggle.


 [Land Reforms] Jan Satyagraha 2012, Janadesh 2007, Bhu-adhikar 1996:
causes and outcomes
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Bhu-Adhikar Abhiyan, MP, 1996

2. Janadesh, 2007
3. Jan Satyagraha 2012
1. #1: General Demands
2. #2: PESA related Demands:
3. #3: Forest Rights Act (FRA) related Demands
4. Outcome of Jan Satyagraha 2012?

Bhu-Adhikar Abhiyan, MP, 1996

Ekta Parishad is an NGO from Madhya Pradesh (1984). On principles of “Samvad, Sangharsh, Rachna”
(dialogue, struggle and construction). They conducted survey in MP and found two main problems
faced by SC/ST:

1. Land belonging to Scheduled tribe was illegally sold to outsiders thanks to land ma a, forest
contractors and corrupt bureaucrats.
2. Non Occupant Patta Holder leased their land poor farmers (occupant cultivators) and exploited
them via high rent and random eviction.

Ekta Parishad has launched a people’s movement with the following objectives.

3. Give Patta (land ownership document) to occupant cultivators.

4. To oppose the policy of inviting tenders from private companies, instead of giving land to the
landless.
5. To enforce joint ownership of husband and wife on the property. (recall the lack of gender equity in
land ownership)
6. Scrap the a orestation programmes funded by the World Bank. Because the money was misused.
7. To resolve the problems of settlement of revenue land.

Result? Government appointed a Committee but it was meaningless eyewash.

Janadesh, 2007

By Ekta Parishad and sister organization / civil society / NGOs

~25000 landless tillers, labourers, Dalits and tribals, who have been deprived of their land rights,
marched from Gwalior to Delhi to assert the land rights of the poor.


Demands?

1. Enact national land rights act.

2. setup national land authority.
3. setup land reforms council
4. fast track courts for land reforms

Result? These demands were met at least half-way by the government, but implementation and follow-
up was poor.

Jan Satyagraha 2012

About Ekta Parishad (NGO) so far we’ve seen:

Ekta Parishad had been working for Land reforms in MP since the 80s.=>State
80s
government setup committee just for eyewash.

2007 They organized Jansandesh. Government agreed but implementation was poor.

they consulted with many other NGOs/organizations to form a broader alliance for land
2008- rights.
10 trained community leaders and activists from the weaker sections to run the next
peaceful movement

started ‘Jan Satyagraha Samvad Yatra’ over 24 states to hold public meetings and
2011
dialogues with people.

Ekta Parishad founder P.V. Rajagopal started Jan Satyagraha Yatra (foot march) from
Gwalior on 1st October 2012.
2012 Their plan was to reach Delhi with 1 lakh people by 28th October 2012.
But Jairam (rural ministry that time), agreed with their demands and hence Yatra
stopped @Agra.

Jan Satyagraha 2012 demanded following:

#1: General Demands

1. Bhoodaan Land= do physical veri cation again and take back land from encroachers/ineligible
persons.
2. Womens Land Rights: To ensure that land owned by a family is recoded either in the name of a
woman or jointly in the name of the man and the woman.
3. Revisit land ceiling laws- implement them e ectively.
4. Identify of lands encroached by ineligible persons and restore it back to original owner.
5. Identify tribal lands alienated to the non-tribals and restore it back.
6. Use MNREGA etc. schemes to doing irrigation projects, land development, wasteland restoration
etc. activities. 
 7. If government acquired land for industrial projects but it was untilized=>give it back to poors.
8. Written Records of tenancy to help tenant farmers get bank loans.
9. Protect/provide burial grounds and pathway to burial grounds, especially to the most vulnerable
communities in the villages;
10. Land record management in most transparent manner
11. Statutory State Land Rights Commissions to monitor the progress of land reform.
12. State governments need to run campaigns to give land to Nomads and settle them permanently.
13. Protect the land rights of following vulnerable groups

Tribal Groups Leprosy a ected people

Single Women Physically /Mentally Challenged People
HIV A ected People Tea Tribes
Siddhis (Gujarat & Karnatka) Salt/Mine/Bidi Workers
Fisherfolks Pastoral communities
Slum inhabitants Bonded Labourers
Hawkers Internally Displaced People (due to infra.projects)

#2: PESA related Demands:

1. Harmonize state revenue laws with PESA 1996, to give gram sabha the power over land matters.
2. For any sale/mortgage of land in the village- Gram Sabha must be noti ed in writing.
3. For any changes in land records, Gram Sabha must be noti ed in writing.
4. authorize Gram Sabha to call for relevant revenue records,
5. conduct a hearing and direct the SDMs to conduct hearings and restore illegally occupied land
6. Expand the list of Schedule V villages to include more eligible villages under PESA
7. Enforce in letter and spirit, the ‘Samata Judgment’ in all acquisition of tribal land for private
companies
8. Governments need to make amendments in State laws that are in con ict with PESA within a period
of one year.

#3: Forest Rights Act (FRA) related Demands

1. bank loan facilities for land grander under FRA

2. Give land rights to tribals who were earlier displaced due to National Parks and Wild life
Sanctuaries
3. Settlement of Forest Rights before land acquisition related projects are started.
4. The primitive tribal groups don’t have any documents/evidences to prove their occupation of
land/residence. So they must be exempted from furnishing of evidence of residence as required
under Forest Rights Act.
5. ‘Orange Areas’ in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, where large extent of land is under dispute
between Revenue Department and the Forest Department =>settle this matter immediately.


Outcome of Jan Satyagraha 2012?
Jan Satyagraha leaders agreed to discontinue their march, after Rural ministry agreed to setup Task
Force on Land Reforms to implement the following agenda:

Agenda Union government agreed that:

National
Land reform is state subject but we will come up with a national land reform policy-
land reform
with inputs from state governments, civil society and public.
policy

like MNREGA and Forest rights act, we’ll come up with new laws for

laws 1. giving land to poors in backward districts

2. guarantee 10 cents of homestead to every landless poor household in entire
India.

we’ll advice state governments to implement their existing laws to protect the land
rights
rights of SC/ST.

we’ll work with States to run Fast Track Land Tribunals/Courts for speedy disposal of
Tribunals
land dispute related cases particularly involving SC/ST.

Rural ministry with work with Tribal ministry and Panchayati raj ministry + state
PESA governments for implementation of PESA 1996. (but then why were you sleeping all
these years?)

Tribal ministry has issued revised rules for Forest rights Act 2006. We’ll ask States to
FRA
implement them quickly.

 we’ll ask states to setup joint teams of forest+Revenue o cials to do the survey of
Survey
the forest and revenue boundaries to resolve disputes

Mock Question: Write a note on the demands and outcomes of Jan Satyagraha 2012.


 [Land Reforms] Cooperative Farming in India: features, bene ts, limitations
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. What is cooperative Farming?

2. Why Cooperative farming?
3. India towards Cooperative Farming
4. Cooperative Farming vs Five Year Plans
5. Cooperative Farming: Limitations/Epicfail
1. Miscalculations and false hopes
2. Bogus farms and apathetic bureaucrats
3. Free riders

What is cooperative Farming?

Cooperative farming refers to an organisation in which:

1. each member-farmer remains the owner of his land individually.

2. But farming is done jointly.
3. Pro t is distributed among the member-farmers in the ratio of land owned by them.
4. Wages distributed among the member-farmers according to number of days they worked.

In other words, Cooperative farming= pooling of land and practicing joint agriculture. Cooperative farming
is not a new concept in India. Since ancient times, Indian farmers have been giving mutual aid to each
other in weeding, harvesting etc. Examples

Traditional Cooperative Farming System Region

Phad Kolhapur

Gallashi Andhra

Why Cooperative farming?

Because it gives following bene ts/advantages/potential:

1. Economies of scale:
a. As the size of farm increases, the per hectare cost of using tube-well, tractor comes down.
b. Small farms=some land is wasted in forming the ‘boundaries’ among them. When they’re
combined into a big cooperative farm, we can also cultivate on that boundary land.
c. overall, Large farms are economically more bene cial than small farms.
2. Solves the problem of sub-division and fragmentation of holdings.
3. Cooperative farm has more men-material-money resources to increase irrigation potential and land
productivity. Members would not have been able to do it individually on their small farm.
4. Case studies generally point out that with cooperative farming, per acre production increases.

India towards Cooperative Farming

Gandhi, Nehru, Socialists and Communists agreed that cooperative

before independence
farming will improve Indian agriculture and bene t the poor.

Cooperative farming is the only way to combat sub-marginal cultivation.

Bombay Plan’44 Government should compel small/marginal farmers to undertake
cooperative farming.

1. large scale cultivation is the only solution to increase agro-production

permanently.
2. Suggested four types of cooperative farming societies viz.
Cooperative Planning
a. better farming
Committee’45
b. tenant farming
c. joint farming
d. Collective farming society.

headed by Nehru. Recommended that:

1. All middlemen should be replaced by non-pro t making agencies, such as

cooperatives.
Economic Program
2. Pilot schemes for cooperative farming among small land holders in India.
committee’47
3. We’ll promote cooperative farming through persuasion, goodwill and
agreement of the peasantry.
4. We’ll not use any legal or administrative force/compulsion/coercion to
make small farmers start cooperative farming.

headed by Kumarappa recommended that:

Empower the state governments to enforce cooperative farming among

peasants with uneconomic land holdings/extremely small farms.
Use intelligent propaganda/awareness campaigns to promote cooperative
Congress Agrarian
farming.
Reforms
Give state aid/ subsidies to cooperative farms.
Committee’49
Specially trained cadre/o cials to train and motivate farmers in
cooperative farming.

So, this is the rst time, someone suggested the State to use “Compulsion” to
promote cooperatives.

Cooperative Farming vs Five Year Plans

First Five Year Plan (1951-56)

 Apart from Cooperative farming, it also recommended ‘Cooperative Village Management’ as a more
comprehensive solution for rural development.
Encourage small and middle farmers to form cooperative farming societies
If majority of farmers agreed to start cooperative farming, then decision will be binding on the entire
village.
But did not talk about giving enforcement powers to States.
Result? ~2000 cooperative farming societies formed during the First Plan period.

Second Five Year Plan (1956-61)

1956: Indian delegations sent to China to study their cooperative farming. Recommended this system
in to increase food grain production.
Develop cooperative farming as soon as possible.
Target: Setup atleast one cooperative farm in every National Extension Block, or about 5000 for the
whole country.
Hoped to convert substantial proportion of Indian farms into cooperative farming by a period of ten
years.

Nagpur resolution of Congress, 1959

1. Cooperative farming will be the the future agrarian pattern of India.

2. farmers will continue to retain their property rights
3. but their land will  be pooled for joint cultivation.
4. Farmers will get a share in the pro t, in proportion to their land.
5. Further, those who actually work on the land, will get wages, in proportion of their work-contribution
(irrespective of whether they own the land or not.) = in other words, cooperative farming will give
employment to landless labourers also. In a way, this was a solution to the #epicfail of land ceiling
(because so far governments could not takeover the surplus land from big farmers and redistribute it
among landless laborers).
6. Start cooperatives related to agro-credit, marketing, seeds-fertilizer etc. Finish this stage within 3
years. Then focus entirely on cooperative farming.

Epicfail of Nagpur resolution

After Nagpur resolution, Many people inside and outside congress, opposed the idea.

who? said what?

Cooperative farming would lead to forced collectivization on the Soviet

1. C. Rajagopalachari
or Chinese pattern.
2. N.G. Ranga
Nehru is imposing a totalitarian, Communist programme upon the
3. Charan Singh
country.
 Nehru (clari es in we’re not going to make any law/act to coerce anyone to start cooperative
Parliament) farming.

Later Chinese attack on Tibet and India. Critiques start pointing out how Nehru’s policies are hurting
India.
Recall, earlier we sent delegations to China, to study their cooperative farming system. But now there
is Anti-China mood in press and public. Hence, gradually Congress gives up the idea of cooperative
farming.

Third Plan (1961-66)

Observed that nearly 40% of the cooperative farms are not functioning properly.
Advocated better implementation of community development program, credit societies, agri-
marketing etc. for getting success in cooperative farming.
~300 pilot projects in selected district. Each project having 10 cooperative societies.
Overall, Third Five year plan tried to put a brave face, again rea rming the government’s faith in
cooperative farming, but overall, wishful platitude not a plan of action.

Fourth Five Year Plan (1969-74)

1. Observed that cooperative farming programs have not made any substantial progress.
2. (therefore) It is not been possible to propose any additional programmes for cooperative farming in
this Plan
3. Instead, we should focus on development of agricultural credit, marketing, processing and consumer
needs.
4. In co-operative farming, funding priority only for revitalizing of the existing weak societies.
5. But avoid setting up new cooperative farming societies, unless they have a potential for growth.

So, overall we can see that by early 70s, Planning commission’s faith/interest in cooperative farming is
vanishing.

Fifth Five Year Plan (1974-79)

1. Made no mention of cooperative farming.

2. It did allot some ca$H under the heading “Cooperation”, but it was only meant for inter-farm co-
operative service facilities e.g. seed-fertilizer-water supply, use of tractors/agro-machineries etc.

After this era, ve year plans give more attention (and ca$H) to wasteland management, poverty removal
etc. and cooperative farming loses its relevance.

Cooperative Farming: Limitations/Epicfail

Miscalculations and false hopes

Early planners and policymakers had hoped that

1. Village panchayat and (Congress) party workers will help implementing cooperative farming, but
response was lukewarm.
2. Cooperative farming = government will have to spend less money on agriculture (+less leakage in
subsidies). But the scenario didn’t change.

During 2nd FYP, the National Development Council proposed that in the next ve years agricultural
production be increased by 25-35% via cooperative farming. But most state government shied away
from taking necessary initiatives.

Bogus farms and apathetic bureaucrats

by and large Cooperative farming societies fell into two categories:

Type#1: by big farmers = bogus farms

They’d setup bogus cooperative farms by showing agri.labourers/tenants as bogus members. But in
reality none of them owned the land individually.
this was done to evade land ceiling and tenancy reform laws.

Adding insult to the injury: government even gave them subsidies for seeds, fertilizers etc.
At times, non-working members had been enrolled in order to ful l the minimum requirements of
registration.
Even in legit/genuine cooperative farming societies, the rich farmers dominate the management
positions.
Sometimes societies setup with members of just one or two families to get various subsidies/support.

Type#2: by State sponsorship= apathetic bureaucrats

State sponsored cooperative farms as part of pilot projects under FYP.

Government would allot land to the landless, SC/ST, Displaced persons etc.
but they did not get adequate support from government agencies for irrigation, electricity, seeds-
fertilizer, extension services etc.
these farms were run like government-sponsored projects rather than genuine, motivated, joint
e orts of the cultivators. Result? These experiments were unsuccessful. No gain in productivity.
Later, those farmers started cultivating land individual (though on papers, the land continued to be
owned by the ‘cooperative societies’.)

#Epicfail in Bihar:

Cooperative farming societies were formed on Bhoodan land- for the landless labourers.
 But later, they started individual farming, although o cially the land still continues to be in the name
of the societies.

Free riders

Some member-farmers become lazy, thinking why bother when we’ll get the same amount of pro t in
proportion of the land owned. Just like those free-rider students in MBA/Engineering College who do
not contribute anything for the powerpoint projects yet get full credits/marks for being member of the
group.
This demotivated sincere farmers from working hard on such cooperative farms.
+ Entry of idiots with political patronage and caste a liations entering in cooperative farming
activities, with their own vested interests.
Ultimately, nobody takes interest in the actual farming and entire project turns op.

Overall, Cooperative farming didn’t grow beyond the government projects and the bogus cooperatives.
 [Land Reforms] Consolidation of Land Holdings, Computerization of Land
Records in India- features, bene ts, limitations
(http://bit.ly/2Dquma1)

1. Prologue
2. Topic#1: Consolidation of Land Holdings
1. What is Consolidation of Land holdings?
2. Why do we need Consolidation of Land holdings?
3. What are the methods of Land consolidation?
1. #1: Voluntary Consolidation
2. #2: Compulsory Consolidation
4. (+ve) Land Consolidation: Bene ts, Advantages, Positive points
5. (-ve) Land consolidation: Di culties, Obstacles, Negative points
3. Topic#2: Computerization of Land Records
1. National Land Records Modernization Programme (NLRMP)
2. Funding pattern of NLRMP
3. Bene ts/Potential of NLRMP
4. Mock Question

Topic#1: Consolidation of Land Holdings

What is Consolidation of Land holdings?

1. Converting many small and fragmented holdings into one big farm.
2. Process by which farmers are convinced to get, one or two compact farms in place of their fragmented
farms.
3. Process in which farmers’ fragmented land holdings are pooled and then re-allotted them in a way
that each gets a single farm of having same total size and fertility like his previous fragmented
landholdings.

1750s: Denmark was the rst country to start land consolidation.

Why do we need Consolidation of Land holdings?

1. Farms in India are not only small in size but also lie scattered.
2. Scattered farms=lot of time, energy and money wasted in moving men and material from one farm to
another= sub-optimal use of resources.
3. Hence land consolidation = essential for progressive farming/ capitalist methods / mechanization of
agriculture.

What are the methods of Land consolidation? 

 #1: Voluntary Consolidation

If the farmers themselves agree to voluntarily consolidate their land holdings.

started in Punjab, in 1921

positive negative

done by local co-operative

very slow.
societies.
Zamindars usually create hurdles in its progress.
does not lead to any dispute
Sometimes a few obstinate (Stubborn) farmers oppose
no pressure/coercion exerted on
the scheme.
anybody.

Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and W.Bengal have passed laws for voluntary consolidation.

#2: Compulsory Consolidation

When consolidation is made compulsory by law, it is called compulsory consolidation.

Again two subtypes:

Partial compulsory consolidation Complete Compulsion

In this case, state government make

If a majority of farmers in a village agree to get their law to compulsory land
holdings consolidated, then the rest of the farmers too consolidation (irrespective of how
will have to get their fragmented holdings consolidated. many farmers actually want it)
1923: MP passed rst act. 1947: Bombay state (now
1936: Punjab passed act. according to this act:  IF 66% of Maharashtra) was the rst state to
the farmers owning 75% of the village land, agreed for enact compulsory
land consolidation, then remaining farmers will have to 1948: Punjab also passed similar act.
compulsory agree. Now many states have passed laws
to this e ect.

(2004 data) overall, more than 1500 lakh hectares land has been consolidated so far. High performer
states: Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh. Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. Slow progress elsewhere.

(+ve) Land Consolidation: Bene ts, Advantages, Positive points

1. Scienti c methods of cultivation, better irrigation, mechanization = possible on consolidated holdings

= reduces cost of production + increases income.
2. Saves farmer’s time, energy and money in moving from one farm to the other.
3. Farmer feels encouraged to spend money on the improvement of his land.
4. No land is wasted in making boundaries between tiny farms.
5. Surplus land after consolidation can be used for construction of gardens, school, Panchayat Ghar,
roads, play grounds and desi liquor dens for the bene t of entire village. 
 (-ve) Land consolidation: Di culties, Obstacles, Negative points

1. Indian farmer has orthodox mindset. He does not want to part with the land of his ancestors, even if it
the principles of modern agri.science/business management advocate land consolidation.
2. Rich farmers own large tracts of fertile land. They oppose consolidation fearing some other farmer will
get part of their fertilize land. (And typical frog mindset: if I cannot climb out of well, no problem, but I’ll
not let any other frog to climb out of well either.)
3. In many areas, farming done on oral agreements, there are no paper records.
4. Land quality/Price within tehsil will vary depending on irrigation and fertility. So, one farmer will have
to pay money (or receive money) depending on land quality, while they exchange their land with each
other.
5. But this price determination is di cult because of lack of land surveys, agri.surveys and
ine cient/corrupt revenue o cials.
6. Revenue o cial @village / Tehsil level are ine cient and not trained in this type of technical work.
7. Recall Ashok Khemka (the IAS o cer who exposed Raabert Vadra/DLF scam.) Earlier, Ashok Khemka
was Director General Consolidation of Land holdings in Haryana. He exposed how land consolidation
related provision were misused in Faridabad district of Haryaya. modus operandi was following:
a. the real estate ma as/dalal type elements would rst buy small patches of unfertile land scattered
in Aravalli hills (using xyz farmers under benami transection.)
b. then they would bribe local tehsildar, patwari to get fragment farms exchanged for consolidated
big farms near the foothills where national/state highways are to be constructed in future=>can be
sold at extremely high prices after 5-10-15 years=truckload of pro t with minimum e ort. Thus
original purpose of land consolidation (to increase agro. productivity) is defeated.

Topic#3: Computerization of Land Records

Under the British Raj, Land Revenue =signi cant source of income for the British. so they maintained
accurate, up-to-date land records.
But after independence, Revenue administration falls under “non-plan” expenditure = doesn’t get
much budgetary allocation.
As a result, revenue department won’t hire many o cers/employees, won’t bother building new
o ces, buying new photocopiers, survey devices, jeeps etc.
Ultimately records became outdated.

But after 80s, there was need for up-to-date land records for industrial purpose, acquiring land for
railways, highways, industries. Up to date land records also help implementing land reforms, designing
agricultural policies and resolving court cases.

So Union government comes up with two schemes in the late 80s:

1. Strengthening of Revenue Administration & Updating of Land Records (SRA&ULR)

2. Computerization of Land Records (CLR)

Later, both schemes merged together into a single scheme NLRMP in 2008. (Imagine the relief of UPSC
aspirants in that era upon knowing they had to mugup just one scheme instead of two!)

National Land Records Modernization Programme (NLRMP)

Who Department of Land Resources under Rural Development Ministry.

When 2008

It has four components:

1. Computerize the property records. Encourage states to legalize computerized copies with digital
signatures.
2. Computerize the registration process: link Sub- registrar ’s o ce with revenue o ces. This helps in
real-time online synchronization of data.
3. do surveys and prepare maps using modern technology- global positioning system (GPS), aerial
photography, high resolution satellite imagery (HRSI) etc.
4. HRD, training, capacity building, awareness generation and other fancy things.

Target: cover all districts by the end of 12th Five year plan.

Funding pattern of NLRMP

Just for information:

% funding by:
work
center state

1. computerize land records 100 0

10% north eastern

90
states
2. survey
50 50% other states

10% north eastern

90
3. computerize registration process, link sub-registrar’s o ce with states
revenue o ces
25 75% other states

10% north eastern

90
states
4. modern record rooms in Tehsil o ces
50 50% other states

5. training, capacity building 100 0

6. Core GIS 100 0


 Bene ts/Potential of NLRMP

1. Provides security of property rights with conclusive titles and title guarantee.
2. Minimizes land disputes.
3. E cient functioning of the economic operations based on land, and overall e ciency of the economy.
4. Integrated land information management system with up-to-date and real time land records. =>even
after drought/famine/disaster, helps government to award compensation to needy farmers.
5. Even helps providing other land-based certi cates such as caste certi cates, income certi cates,
domicile certi cates; information for whether given citizen is eligible for xyz. Government scheme or
not.
6. no need for stamp papers
7. stamp duty and registration fees can be paid even through banks.
8. Computerized entries=less opportunities for patwari to demand bribes.
9. NLRMP is a demand driven scheme. States/UT frame the project according their local requirements,
send their le to Delhi and get the ca$h.
10. provides location speci c information to planners and policymakers.
11. helps e-linkages to credit facilities/banks.

Mock Question
12/15 marks

1. What do you understand by Land consolidation? Discuss the measures taken in India for consolidation
of land holdings.
2. De ne Cooperative farming. Why has it not met with grand success in India?
3. Cooperative farming has not taken rm roots in India. Examine the causes and suggest remedies.
4. Explain the importance of National Land Records Modernization Programme (NLRMP) as a tool of land
reforms in India.

In the next article, we’ll see forest rights act, draft national policy and few other misc topics. That’ll be
(most likely) the last article under [Land reform] series.