UNIT 4 LAND TENURE SYSTEMS AND AGRARIAN STRUCTURE - I1Contents 4.0 4.1 4.2 Objectives Introduction South India 4.2.1 4.2.2 Re-British Agrarian Structure and Land Tenure Systems Agrarian Structure and Land Tenure Systems during Colonial Period 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 Land Tenure Systems in North India Impact of British Rule in Northern and Central India Initiatives to Change Land Tenure and Agrarian Structure after Independence Let Us Sum Up Key Words Suggested Readings 4.0 OBJECTIVES After going through this unit you will be able to understand: l a d tenure systems and agrarian structure during pre-British and British period in North, South and Central part of India; the kind of land tenure and agrarian structure existed in North-East region of the country; the need of transformation in agrarian structure by introducing elements .of change in land tenure systems; and the nature of land tenure system and agrarian structure after independence. 4.1 INTRODUCTION In the previous Units we have read that the systems of land tenure introduced by the British in various parts of India were more or less of the same nature and had identical results. The outcome of the land settlements instituted by the British can be summarized as1) It created a class of parasitic landlords, moneylenders, land speculators and Waders. They dealt mainly with agricultural produce and started playing an ipportant role in the governance of countryside. This class was not interested in any productive investment or agricultural development. It promoted commercialization of agriculture especially in the areas producing for export. It turned land into a private property. It made it possible that land could be alienated from the cultivators, throughout the country. The parasitic elements who were controlled the countryside had dominant hold on surplus produce generated by the cultivators. 2) 3) In this unit a similar exercise is undertaken to understand the land tenure systems and agrarian structure in the South, Northern and Central part of the country. This unit sketches some important feature of land tenure systems and agrarian structure in remaining parts of India during pre-British and British period. The unit emphasises the need of transformation in agrarian society after independence and the nature of existing land tenure systems and agrarian structure after independence. Hindu inam as 'agraharams'. .2 SOUTH INDIA Land Tenure Systems and Agrarian ~tueture-11 4. Classified functionally and communally. host of imams were often known by their designated names. Frykenberg (1977) has differentiated 'inam' in four main categories according to their functioning. It originated from a grant from those in authority in the political community. Another striking feature was that some agricultural castes (vellaler) also entered in the poligarship. usually a minority. These mirasidars were considered as owners of the village. though numerically dominant. Poona and Mysore. Grants by the rulers were called 'sanadi-inams' and grants coming out of village resources were called 'gramu-inam' or 'manyam'.2. Thus there were many villages which were not under the direct management of the state but were independently managed by some individuals/institutions. used to perform the duties like policeman in the small localities. 'shrotiyams' and 'yatra Che-kathis' etc. This settlement was known as Ryotwari Settlement. Poligars had rented the villages. The tiny poligars. These Vellaler poligars were either the residents of same village or came from the neighbourhood. The most important was the prevalence of villages plaLed under the poligars. The late pre colonial South India had the mirasi system which may be considered like a social grammer through which one can understand one's wealth.1 Pre-British Agrarian Structure and Land Tenure System The accounts of villages in South India indicate extensively the existence of villages managed by those other than the state before advent of British rule in India. They were the controllers of the production activities in the village. iii) Social service holdings. Everyone from village functionaries to the state was expected to perform its role for which some share in the product was assigned. Mirasi right was known to be stable. These categories have been broadly classified as i) Socioreligious holdings. ii) Socio-political holdings. Most of these categories were then defined or described as land holdings either wholly or almost wholly free from taxation.4. on hereditary and perpetual occupations. For example Muslim imams were known as 'waqf and 'muafi'. 'Privilege' in land holding was viewed as an arrangements that pertained to advantages (rights and immunities) enjoyed by some. and iv) Socio-economic holdings. 4. A descriptive list of imams tenure of Madras presidency was submitted to the Government on 30"' October 1869 and contained some 452 separate categories of imams. status and power in the society. When Munro became governor of Madras in 1820. The significant feature of the 'mirasi' was that even Nawab could not usurp it by force and had to purchase it.2 Agrarian Structure and Land Tenure Systems during Colonial Period East India Company established its rule in Canara in 1800 and claimed its base in Hyderabad. mortagageable and inheritable. On the basis of the records of the East India Company in South India. In South India this grant was known as 'inam' which meant grant of land held rent free. Some time a village rented at a privileged rate was granted to one of them. he established his system of settlement throughout the Presidency wherever zamindari settlements were not in force. Another concept related to land holding prevalent in South India before the colonial conquest is described by Robert Frykenberg as 'privileged land holding'. These were recorded as the mirasidars. In the same way a number of villages were placed under the various categories of people or institutions as well. Those poligars who had jurisdiction over hundreds of village used to exert pressure like a king with the help of their military followers.2. Munro was able to arrange a political settlement with the important leaders and lords of the villages and formed alliances with local/ village leaders. speculators with little experience of the revenue system. Whefi the Permanent Settlement was introduced. The cultivator was able to invest in land. retaining one third for the expenses of his revenue establishment and his personal income. It appears that the peasants of the southern zamindaris were in general more secure than those in northern zamindaris. in principle. Thereafter. But by 1822. The zamindaris also varied in size. The terms of trade moved in favour of agriculture. the policy adopted was that. for the sake of political stability there should be minimum disturbance in the traditional rights.Land Tenure Systems and Agrarian Structure Thus. as and when the village leases expired. However. These leases were initially to last for three or five years followed by decennial leases. similar arrangements were made in certain districts of Madras Presidency. Large irrigation works were completed on the rivers Godavaci and the Krishna. In general. Whether revenue be taken directly from individual cultivators or contracts be made with intermediaries. the area under zamindari declined. The land revenue was fixed in perpetuity. Whenever zamindars were unable to pay the revenue as demanded. they confronted major problems in the identification of persons with whom to settle the land revenue. The zamindars were a diversified group. groundnut and oilseeds increased. Though colonial administration recognized the marasidar's status as village lords. Initially ryotwari settlements were introduced in certain districts. Though the land revenue and tenure in this part of India was basically ryotwari. Some were enormous. who may have been the former rent collectors. sometimes covering almost the whole of a district while others consisted of just a few villages. While some claimed descent from kings or military chieftains. the area under cultivation increased faster than the population. it was decided that the ryotwari system should be introduced in all the non-zamindari areas. The cultivation of cotton. and uncultivated land were given to the zamindars tax free. or the leading cultivators of the village. the land revenue was generally fixed at half the gross produce on unirrigated lands and three-fifths on irrigated land. the zamindaris were made both inheritable and transferable. But soon after the introduction of Permanent Settlement in Bengal. The cultivator was thus often left with very little. In this part of India. thus completely different. As the British extended their rule over South India. or in some cases. Yet others were new men who had bought estates. Besides the land revenue and the amounts officially set aside for community purposes and village officials. the first half of the nineteenth century was a period of experimentation with methods of collecting the land revenue. The late nineteenth century South India was. others from tax officials. the government confiscated their estates and converted them to ryotwari. notably on the Krishna- ' . price of grains rose by 100 per cent or even more. the British did not always uphold this principle. it was assumed that the zamindars would collect half the gross produce and pay two-thirds of that to the government in cash. But even then around one-fourth of the area remained under zamindari system until the 1940s. the division of rights between the peasants and the zamindars remained undefined. Colonial administration had created the class of 'pattadars' who were given the central role in the village as the land holder. and deviated it from time to time. there was unrecorded plunder by revenue officials. Political stability was an importqnt factor which guided policy-for-multation. Under the ryotwari system. The building of roads and railways facilitated trade. it was of little consequence in terms of economic value. But the actual collection from the peasants were much higher than this. Between 1881-82 and 191516. During the later half of the nineteenth century. Progress was rapid in some regions. though they had nothing to do with the village people. The burden of land revenue fell. For sometime the land revenue collection from the villages in most areas was contracted out to middlemen. by 1830 over a third of the Presidency was under zamindari system. .......... Rut the depression of the 1930s hit both the rich as well as the poor....... Ranga calculated in 1926 that the price of fertile land had risen from Rs. Moreover........ ..................... The real income of the village had increased by 250 per cent during the same period..... tenancy disputes were rare..... during the 20th century.................. Indebtedness of rural population increased during the 19th century... ............ after that the gap between them became wider..... N............. Tenants in ryotwari areas had no legal standing................... ... Grain looting and attacks on rich moneylenders and landlords were symptoms of the widespread agrarian distress........ Generally. there is little evidence regarding the growth of tenancy during the British rule............... 40 to Rs........... .................................... The rural economy as a whole grew much poorer in the 1938............ The quantities of manure per acre and the number of manuring was occasionally prescribed..... In one village....... Until 1916 or so............................... 1500 per'acre in sixty years....................... .... Mention major land tenure systems in South India during pre-colonial period.................. and water channels..................... Land Tenure Systems and Agrarian Stucture-I1 Check Your Progress 1 Note: i) ii) 1) Space is given below each question for your answers... Payment of fixed revenue became difficult. The same trend continued during the early 20th century and during the Great Depression. The tenant provided the manure.... ...G............. The burden of debt became so pressing that the government was forced to take action....... The tenants' share also depended on input sharing arrangements..... Whether because of the relative infrequency of tenancy disputes or because of an implicit assumption that tenancy could not be a problem under a system of 'peasant proprietorship' like ryotwari..................... Since they were considered as a weak party................... when agricultural prices rose sharply that there was a fall in the real burden of debt........ Peddapadu in east Godavari............................................................ The most common arrangement was share-cropping and the tenant commonly got half the crop on dry land... the increase in agricultural output probably managed to match the increase in population.... Farmers were not able to pay back their loans.............. This led to tremendous increase in prices of land............. It was only during Second World War............ mica and other industries... hardly any measures were taken in Madras Presidency to protect the tenants.. but over the 1930s the volume of debt rose further.................. but his share could be less on fertile...... irrigated land ranging from one-third to one-fourth of the crop................................... The rich peasants widened the sphere of their activities and invested in rice mills............. The debt conciliation boards set up by the government during the Depression scaled down debts in some cases.................... Agricultural prices and employment fell sharply...Godavari delta.................... the landlord paid the land revenue and made substantial repairs to wells... Usually the leases were oral but were continued for long periods... Check your answers with the text.... According to Dharma Kumar.. population was growing faster than agricultural output............................... .................... They extended their moneylending business and went into banking...... .................. He was permitted to sell... ....3 THE LAND TENURE SYSTEMS IN THE NORTH INDIA The major land tenure systems prevalent in North India were Zamindari.......... In this system every individual farmer did farming for which he was paying land revenue................... The major shortcoming of this system were high rhte of tadcess and also the rigidity of the government in extracting tax in the c'alamity like famine........ for the fixed or certain amount for a fixed term or time period......... The consequence of this policy was that millions of persons who were proprietors of their land they cultivated from time immemorial.. were reduced to the position of mere tenants at will.. but it was owned collectively by village sabhdgram sabha.............................................. . others were called co-sharers................ Mahalwari and Ryotwari................... Middle province and some parts of Punjab and North-Westem provinces........................................ Any individual was free to leave the land and in such cases gram sabha was responsible for handling of that land.................. It was prevalent in some districts of Jeeut province Agra.... In Mahalwari system of land tenure individual f m e r was both a zarnindar and a rent payer................................ He was also responsible in the collectivity for the share of his friends and viceversa. which was prevalent in North-Westem provinces and Awadh...... In regulations of 1822 the Board of Commissioners also suggested to extract fixed revenue from the village that was to be collected by lambandar or gram pradhan. He was responsible for paying land revenue to the British govemment................... And it could not be reduced even in time of natural calamity.. Under the zamindari system the native tax gatherers who had never taken any part in actual cultivation were conferred proprietary rights.. In Mahalwari system the unit of land revenue was the village or the mohalla (a part of zagir)... This system was subject of modification on various occasions becacse the farmers ..... Mahalwari system was being implemented in 30 percent part of the British India.. while during the time of Nawab land revenue arrangements could be reduced in case natural calamity occurred...... The British govemment had made various regulations and reorientation from time to time and changed the fixed land revenue.. ................ In the previous units we have already discussed about the nature of land tenure systems..... In Ryotwari every registered individual farmer was considered as owned of that land..Land Tenure Systems and Agrarian Structure 2) Which settlement is known as Munro settlement? .............. .............. Avadh.......................................... British rulers had established these land tenure systems to r~organizeIndian agrarian structure to serve their interests....... They were all endowed with joint responsibility............. In Mahalwari system iddividual members were not responsible for the collection of revenue and its payment to British......... After that villagers divided their respective shares and fixed their amount of land cess............... the land revenue was fixed......... lease and sublet his land any time............... Some scholars view it as favourable to the domestic tradition of India.......................................... 4....... In Mahalwari system.... The owner of land was not the individual farmer................. Ih Mahalwari system farmers were responsible for the payment of land revenue both individually and collectively..................... but all the owners of land in the territory of a village collectivity made an agreement on behalf of the village representatives or village mukhiyd ptadhan.......................... draught etc...... For the first time land maps and registers . It was only in 1834 that a long settlement for twenty years was concluded in these territories. and permanency and zarnindars would be grateful to the government. From the very-beginning British government wanted to extract maximum revenue from the central parts of India and for this region heavy assessment was imposed by the British. In Punjab and parts of United Provinces. Initially.The British assumed that permanency of settlement or zamindari system would bring order. Initially the burden of revenue was very heavy. The ryoyat could retain the land so far as he paid the land revenue assessed by the state. Each individual cultivator contributed his share in the revenue. under any system of land tenure introduced by the British Government proprietary rights were not absolute. The registered farmer in the British Government used to give his land revenue to the government directly. They could not be deprived from his land. Under the new settlement of 1864. Ryotwari system was not related to big zamindars or landlords but linked to those small landlordlzamindars who were doing their fanning with the help of small farmers or poor landless tenants. British government wanted to introduce a system that gave them right and scope of escalating land revenue from time to time in other areas. which was allowed to continue till the early 1860s. Land keeping farmers were directly responsible for providing revenue to the government. Ryotwari system was in accordance to Indian tradition because in this system land tenure was given by those tenants/ farmers who did farming themselves. In principle it was reduced to twothirds after 1833 and to one-half after 1855. In 1822 William Bentik made an assessment of-~ahalwarisystem and in 1833 passed a regulation that tried to simplify system of assessment of yield and revenue. Martin Bind was responsible for introducing new land revenue system in Northern India. Land Tenure Systems and Agrarian Stucture-11 4. In short. but in actual practice this principle was not adhered to. Land revenue was fixed in Mahalwari on the . malaguzars or revenue-payers were recognized as the proprietors of the soil with . However. impoverished the people. But it did not happened. revenue demands were oppressive and extortionist in all the systems. that was introduced in the Central Provinces. The mistake was realized at a later date and was condemned in the strongest terms. An estate was called as Mahal. High assessment land and an impossible revenue. sell. and even in the case of zamindari areas only a small proportion of land was under permanent settlement. the rest were settled temporarily. He was known as the father of land settlement in the northern regions. keep it for lease or lease it. Being supreme the British government had every right to determine the amount of revenue that was payable to the state.were prepared after the assessment. considerations of enhancement of revenue led to the abandonment of fixed revenue system. if they regularly paid the land revenue. Mahalwari system was introduced where the unit of assessment was the village. They had the right on land to sublet. The basic assumption behind Ryotwari system was that the state would be the sole land owner which will grant patta or title to ryoyats. The British laid claim to about 85 per cent of the rental. but after 1811.basis of village to village and estate by estate.4 .IMPACT OF BRITISH RLTLE IN NORTHERN AND CENTRAL INDIA In Northern India various kinds of land tenure systems were inter mixed as both Zamindari and Mahalwari systems were introduced in this region. Bengal type permanent settlement was favoured. After default in payment British administration had right to auction all types of land. Different average were made for different kind of lands.were very unhappy due to its rigid and exploitative nature. In this system payment of revenue became the joint responsibility of the village propsietary body. and had to borrow money for payment of tax or took advance from the village moneylenders of the local grain dealer-cum-moneylender. It was estimated that 10 percent of agricultural land had already passed into the hands of. . As a result. title to alien creditors. In Shahjahanpur district the fatal effects of accepting the inducement of urban Khandsaris or sugar factories became so notorious that the Chandel Rajputs inhabiting the Ramganga tract in the Khundur pargana refused to grow sugarcane bearing loss of their independence and proprietary. under the permanent settlement. m e s e moneylenders-cum-traders were more interested in receiving rent or in controlling the disposal of cash crops grown by the peasants than directly engaging in agricultu~. who was in some cases also the village accountant (patwari). . These mutations were effecting a rapid and complete revolution in the position of the ancient proprietors of the soil. Behind this alienation and mortgage of land. They estimated what the rental should be from their own calculations. the rental considered as &e basis of assessment was higher than the actual rents received by the land owners. the land sales increased. While mortgage was growing rapidly. did not materialise. but the principle was not adhered at the time of assessment. decrees were being carried out through 'the civil courts in the 1870s.Land Tenure Systems and Agrarian Structure a right to sell or mortgage their property. Secondly. In principle it was decided that the land revenue would be limited to one-half of the rental of estates. But despite the Alienation Act the professional moneylenders in Bundelkhand remained a permanent part of the rural scene and kept their hold over the peasants. Continuous transfer of land from cultivators to moneylenders prompted legislation in the shape of Bundelkhand Alienation Act of 1903. The transfer of ownership of land was massive and fast. there emerged a serious and much larger problem of indebtedness. and based the land. Tenancy rights were conferred on the cultivators. Thus the introduction of legal private property right in land tended to enhanci the claim of intermediaries above the actual cultivator and left the peasant based small scale traditional cultivation intact. sugarcane and wheat. constantly and extensively. Thus. as 'the wily mahajan' and 'sleek. impassive bania'. They were forced to produce cash crops like indigo. Similarly by the time of the 1864 Settlement in the districts of Central Provinces. Impact of Land Revenue System We noticed that land revenue was to be paid in cash. Yet official opinion remained opposed to any tampering with free trade in land because of the fear that legislative inference might seriously upset the provision of rural credit and jeopardize the security of the land revenue. the payment of revenue in cash generated a pressure on the cultivators. Consequently. The expectation of the British of the emergence of capitalist agriculture. almost the whole of the profits was taken away by the moneylenders. not in kind. was the position strengthened. Probably in no other country in the world the land tenures had changed hands so certainly. ravenue demand on the estimated rentals. Settlement officers did not accept the actual rental of esgites. The Board of Revenue on revenue administration of North West Province commented in 1854. On the other hand. land revenue demand was higher than 50 per cent of actual rental. Land Transfers With the introduction of private ownership and transferable proprietary rights in land. the revenue of the state did not increase. which would benefits from the economies of scale. The cultivator was concerned more by his immediate cash requirements to meet revenue and rent installments and other expenses like marriage in the family rather than by prospects of higher profits from valuable crops especially when the profits tended to make their way to the middleman's pocket. what district officers termed. the amount of revenue was kept fixed for a period of twenty or thirty years. there is still a wide gap between the proclaimed objectives and the actual outcome. on the one hand. After the 731d Constitutional Amendment Act 1992. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) I Abolition of intermediaries and bringing the tenants in direct contact with the government. as a result. To eliminate all elements of exploitation and ensure social-injustice within agrarian system. The Centre and State government have. Redistribution of land by imposing ceiling on agricultural holding. adopted important strategies for rural development by effecting major reorganization of socio-economic structure through land reforms. had divorced the landownership from the vast mass of peasantry who were the actual cultivators. i) ii) To remove mdvational and other impediments to increase agricultu. land reforms were initiated as an attempt to alter the pattern of distribution of land holding through radical measures by the state.al production. Several subjects related to . and Updating and computerization of land records. Government of India has been continuing play its advisory role in the field as the subject is in the state list of the constitution and is in exclusive legislative and administrative jurisdiction of the States.4. a radical measure in the form of land reforms was required to bring fundamental changes in rural social structure and economy. Consolidation of holdings. on the other. The main objective of the reforms policy may be summed up as: . Therefore. The agrarian structure which was marked. The measures of land reforms policy have been prominently laid down in the Five Year Plan documents. Prevention of alienation/restoration of alienated tribal land. Panchayati Raj institutions have become very important. Tenancy reforms with a view to provide security of tenure to actual cultivators of land against eviction and regulation of rents. The land reforms have been considered as the number one priority area in the whole range of rClral development activities and have been on the national agenda of rural construction has been constantly recognized in the successive Five Year Plans. The Land Reforms Division of the Ministry of Rural Development has been playing a crucial role for evolving a national consensus at various stages for taking up major steps towards effective land reforms which included the abolition of Zamindari and of all the intermediaries since the beginning of fifties. by the concentration of land ownership in the hands of 4 parasitic class who played no positive role in the production and. Several factors were responsible for these acts. Important landmarks in the policy has been the introduction of family ceiling on agricultural holdings from mid fifties and monitoring the progress of distribution of ceiling surplus land as part of the 20 Point Programme of the Government since ' seventies.5 ' INITITAIVES TO CHANGE LAND TENURE AND AGRARIAN STRUCTURE AFTER INDEPENDENCE and Tenure Systems and Agrarian ~tucture-II The pre-independence agrarian structure that was marked with great inequality in the ownership of land had received serious attention after Independence. 6) Though the Centre and State governments have initiated several meaningful measures related to land reforms. In India. The land reforms programme strive to fulfill all the principles ' of National Land Reforms policy which consists of the following measures. it may be noticed that nearly 310 million acres of land were estimated to be owned by rural households in 1953-54. The next 24.72 acres. The owned area of 310 million acres was held by 66 million households.9 per cent of the households together held only 1. therefore have to be viewed from socio-economic and political perspectives. the efficiency of cultivation which depends on appropriate combination of different factors of production. . In 1953-54 nearly 8 percent of ownership holding accounted for 54 percent of the total land.42 acres). at the all India level there was tendency towards unequal power structure in terms of land ownership. was owned by urban households. Thus. The average size of ownership holdings in the rural areas was around 4. through a process of leasing in and leasing out. which provided the basis for improvement in agricultural productivity.74 and the lowest in North India and West. The disparity in the distribution of ownership holdings seems to have been the highest in South India.21 hectares in 1971 in several states.4 per cent of the total geographical area and 61 per cent of the topographically usable land. we will discuss the concept of "operational" or "cultivation" holdings which refers to the operational holdings that is more appropriate to the efficiency of agricultural operation. and in introducing the Land Reforms a flexible approach has been adopted to suit and respond to the differing local requirements. The first phase of post independence land reforms in 1950s and 1960s yielded mixed results. the average size of large farms increased. The nature of the land problem varies from state to state and even from region to region. even with a very adverse distribution of ownership. Nearly 22 per cent of the households in the rural areas did not hold any land. The average size of holding was the lowest in South India (about 3.64. less inconsistent with the dictates .4 per cent of the land and each of these held an area less than 1 acre in size. Pattern of Operational Holdings Now in this section. This was nearly 38. where the concentration ratios were 0. where the concentration ratio was 0. The land reforms in India. while it was the highest in Central India (about 8. How far does such extreme inequalities in the distribution of ownership holdings affect the agricultural economy is a question that follows naturally. In actual practice the land reforms have faced problems and issues have varied from one point of time to another. nearly 47 per cent of the households either held no land or held land with an area of less than one acre. It may be pointed out that. A certain proportion of land in the rural areas. Also the benefits of consolidation of holdings remained confined to Punjab.39 hectares in 1993-54 to 2. However.Land Tenure Systems and Agrarian Structure land reforms have been put under the jurisdiction of Panchayati Raj institutions and these institutions have to play a vital role in the successful implementation of various land reform programmes. the situation is far worse. India. The ideological and political factors and the way the ownership and the use of land is interlocked with the power structures have been matters of great importance and significance. Theoretically. The tenancy reforms failed to yield much positive impact. no doubt. it is possible to have a pattern of operational holdings. Nevertheless.29 acres). Although the average size of holding declined from 2. the unequal agrarian structure remained in place. It could be termed successful in the sense that the intermediaries were abolished. and western Uttar Pradesh. These households constituted the cultivating small tenants. as a large number of tenants-at-will were evicted from land. Pattern of Ownership Holdings: With regard to the pattern of ownership holdings. Harayana. But when we look at the size of distribution of holdings. Land Tenure Systems and Agrarian Stucture-II 4. ed. . Manohar. land distribution remained highly skewed... and if that were the pattern of operational holdngs.5 per cent operated 29 per cent of area. Land Tenure and Peasant in South Asia. Bombay. In these units attempts have been made to acquaint you of various p. (1977). stable and inheritable.6 LET US SUM UP In this unit.E. peasant and landless labourers and the gap between these classes were widened day by day.5 per cent of area while in 1960-61 the bottom 62 per cent of holdings operated 19 per cent of area. there would be too many tiny f m s ' (operational holdings) and some f m s too large for efficient cultivation.. It was mortgageable.E. Popular Publication. In 1953-54. in 1953-54 the top 5. As a matter of fact. Thus. or with the requirements of the laws of returns.8 per cent of holdings operated 36. ed. Manohar.of efficient technology. he has to purchase it. It was the British policy which forced Indian economy to serve the interest of British economy. which were not conductive for economic and social development. if there was a very little of leasing out of land by large owners and very little leasing in by small owners. New Delhi. Although a small decline in concentration of land took place after the land reform legislation. or of returns to scale. Northern and Central India from pre colonial period to ~nde~endence. We have observed that the development in agriculture sector was not natural but forced one. R. we have attempted an understanding of the evolution of land tenure systems in South India. The significant feature of this right was that even Nawab could not usurp it by force. Peasantry was forced to sell their products in order to meet there revenue payment obligation in cash. Social Background of Zndian Nationalism. At the other end. Frykenberg. Munro Settlement : 4. Known as Ryotwari Settlement.6 per cent of area while in 1960-61 the top 4. British agrarian policy in northern and central India stratified Indian peasantry into a rich landlord. the pattern of operational holdings would look much the same as that of ownership. (1979).- - Desai. R. In the process of evolution of land relations a non agriculturist community emerged which strengthened its grip on rural land and agricultural produce.7 KEY WORDS : Mirasi right The ownership right of farming community over village land. A. We have also discussed about various measures initiated by the Government of India and state governments to overcome the problems of rural people that emerged due to land relations during British period. the process of exploitation of poor peasant began.oblems that emerged in the agrarian structure due to changes in land relations. New Delhi.8 SUGGESTED READINGS . 4. the bottom 60 per cent of holdings operated 15. Land Control and Social Structure in Zndian History.R. Frykenberg. A brief effort has been made to acquaint the readers about post independent scenario also. (1948). B. . (1987). Vol-1 and Vol-2. Land Revenue in India: Historical Studies.L. Roinesh. . Discovery Publishing House. Sharma. Delhi. Bharat Me Upniveshvad. (1971). Manohar Publishing House. Manohar Publication. Singh.P. Sociology of Development in India. Satya (1990). Delhi. R. Indian History. Motomahal Banarsidas. The Economic History of India.Land Tenure Systems and Agrarian Structure Grover. Dutta (1990). R. Delhi.S. Delhi. (1985). Delhi. Low Prise Publications. Roy.