British Land tenure System: features, Consequences of Permanent Settlement, Ryotwari,

Mahalwari
1. Prologue
2. What is land reform?
3. Players in Land Tenancy 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
1
Freedom Struggle its various stages and important contributors
/contributions
Social empowerment
poverty and developmental issues
Post-independence consolidation
2
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,
Indian Constitution: significant 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 Subject land reforms included in:
Political Science
Paper 1
Planning and Economic Development : Green Revolution, land reforms and
agrarian relations
Sociology Paper 2 Agrarian social structure evolution of land tenure system, land reforms.
Geography Paper
2
land tenure and land reforms;
Economics Paper
2
Agriculture: Land Reforms and land tenure system, Green Revolution and
capital formation in agriculture.
History Paper 2
1. Land revenue settlements in British India: The Permanent Settlement;
Ryotwari Settlement; Mahalwari Settlement;
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 benefits
and limitations
4. Land reforms, After independence: abolition of Zamindari, Land Ceiling and Tenancy reforms.
Their benefits and limitations
5. Land reforms by non-governmental action: Bhoodan, Gramdan, NGOs etc. their benefits and
limitations
6. Land reforms in recent times: Computerization of land records, Forest rights Act, land reform
policy etc. their benefits and limitations.
Sources used for this [Land reform] Article series
1. IGNOU MA (Rural Development) Course code MRDE 003
2. Bipin Chandra: Indias 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:
Static (50s to 80s)
1. Abolish intermediaries, Zamindar, Jagirdar etc.
2. land ceilings- redistribute surplus land
3. Tenancy reforms
current (after 80s)
1. computerize land records
2. forest rights act
3. land consolidation
Formal definitions
definition Land reforms mean:
#1 Improving land tenure and institutions related to agriculture.
#2
redistribution of property rights
For the benefit of the landless poor.
#3
integrated program
to remove the barriers for economic and social development
Caused by deficiencies 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?
The State
1. enforces tenancy contracts
2. Maintains law and order.
Earns revenue for doing 1+2
Owner
The owner: the guy who owns land
They pay Revenue to the State.
Rich farmers, Zamindars etc. own hundreds of acres of land. Cant cultivate it
on their own.
Similarly minors, disabled, widows, soldiers, fishermen may also own land but
they cant cultivate for one reason or another.
So these people lease their land to other farmers (tenants).
Superior
tenants
They cultivate on land leased from the ^owner.
These are hereditary tenants. Meaning they cultivate same land generation
after generation.
They pay rent to the owner.
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.
Inferior
Tenants
Other names: tenants at will, subordinate tenants, temporary tenants,
subtenants.
They till the land leased from other tenants/owners.
They pay rent to the owners/superior tenants.
They have limited rights over the land.
They cannot sell or mortgage the land.
They can be evicted easily.
Share
croppers
Sharecroppers= cultivate other persons 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
They have no rights whatsoever on the land.
They cannot sell, rent or mortgage the land.
Can be evicted easily.
Landless
laborers
1. They get paid in cash or kind by the owners (or tenants)
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 countrys gain required another country/colonys
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 finished goods back to India=> make profit.
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:

Tenure
system
Presidency Features:
Permanent
settlement
1. Bengal
2. Bihar
(BeBi)
Who? Cornwallis + John Shore. In Bengal + Bihar.
1793
Company outsourced the revenue collection work
to Zamindars
Very exploitative. Led to many revolts. Hence
British didnt implement it in other parts of India.
In Awadh/Oudh, Lord Delhousie wanted to
implement Mahalwari but then 1857s munity broke
out. Later Lord Canning
introduced Talukdari system-similar to Permanent
settlement.
Ryotwari
1. Madras,
2. Bombay
3. Assam
(MBA)
Who? Thomas Munro and Read in Madras. (1820)
Who? Wingate and Goldsmid in Bombay (1835). In
1820 it was tried in Poona but failed. Later Wingate
and Goldsmid start Bombay Survey System in
1835 for individual settlement system.
Company directly collected revenue from farmers.
Madras was initially under Permanent settlement
type system but Thomas Munro convinced the
directors of East India company to convert this area
under Ryotwari / direct settlement system.
Mahalwari
1. Gangetic
valley
2. north-west
provinces,
3. parts of central
India
4. Punjab
Company outsourced revenue collection work to
Village community itself. Technically village
headman (Lambardar) was made responsible for
tax collection
North West Provinces initially had Permanent
settlement but transformed to Mahalwari system by
Holt Mackenzie.(1822)
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 fixed at the beginning and remained the same permanently.
7. Zamindar were given freedom to decide how much to demand from the cultivators. Stiff
penalties on defaulters.
8. there was a provision of keeping a portion of taxes for the zamindar himself.
9. Zamindars right over land was
1. Alienable: meaning British could take it away and give it to another Zamindar, if first
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 Zamindars 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 financial 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.
Governments income declined over the years, Because Revenue was permanently fixed +
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 +
finished textile exported to India.
To prevent any competition from Desi textile industries, the British imposed variety of taxes
and tariffs 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
zamindars 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 first 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 specific
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 farmers 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 first in Madras State and then adopted in Bombay, and Assam. But Why?
1. In permanent settlement areas, land Revenue was fixed. But over the years, agriculture
prices/exports should increase but governments 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 fixed 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 didnt 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 hed leasing it to another farmer.
Thus, sub-leasing, indebtedness and landlessness became more and more common in
Mahalwari region
Why is it called Modified Zamindari system?
Because in Mahalwari areas, the Land revenue was fixed 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
other intermediaries)
Owned 75% of fertile land
48% of villagers (tenants, sub-tenants)
Owned 25% of fertile land. (=imagine the land
fragmentation and size of landholdings)
45% of villagers
Owned no land. Worked as farm laborers, petty traders,
craftsman etc.
Total 100% Total 100%
Consequences of British Tenure systems
Land becomes a property
Before British During British rule
private ownership of land did not
exist
land belonged to the village
community
Land was never treated as the
property of the kings -benevolent
or despotic, Hindu, Muslims or
Buddhist.
Land was not treated as individual
cultivators property either.
Introduced private ownership of land
This divided village into 1) landlords 2)tenants
3)labourers
This this material transformation the agrarian
society in India witnessed profound social,
economic, political, cultural and psychological
change.
with generations- land kept dividing among
sons=>land fragmentation, diseconomies of
scale, lower production.
Panchayat lost Prestige
Before British During British rule
Land matters and civil disputes were
adjudicated by Panchayat within the
village.
Farmer had to approach British courts for matters
related to Revenue, property attachment, debt-
mortgage etc.
Panchayats lost their power and prestige
Food insecurity
Before British During British rule
farmers usually grew
foodcrops- wheat, maize,
paddy, jowar, bajra and pulses
Since British demand revenue in CASH, farmers
resorted to growing cash crops: indigo, sugarcane,
cotton=> Area under foodcrop cultivation declined
Then, Lacks of People would die of starvation
during famines.
Even after independence, and before green
revolution- India was not self-sufficient 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
(195156).

Canals
Before British During British rule
Kings constructed ponds, British did construct new canals
canals and wells to
improve agriculture
irrigation taxes were
moderate.
Positive: more area brought under cultivation, particularly
in Punjab.
but most canals caused salinity and swamps=>declined
productivity over the years
Taxes on Irrigation were quite high. Therefore Canal
irrigation was used to grow sugar, cotton and other cash
crops, instead of food crops=>food insecurity, starvation
and death during famines.
Cash economy & indebted farmers
Before British During British rule
Land Revenue was paid in kind.
Village was a self-sufficient
economy with cooperative units.
e.g. blacksmith would make farm-
tools, would get yearly payment in
grains/kind.
Moneylending, mortgaging were
negligible.
British obliged the farmers to pay revenue in
cash and not in kind.
The land revenue was increased arbitrarily to
finance British wars and conquests. But The
farmers had no right to appeal in the court of
law.
Farmers had no understanding of cash economy
+ frequent droughts and famines
Hence they had to borrow money from
unscrupulous grain traders and money-
lenders=> compound interest rate, perpetual
indebtedness.
Eventually, the typical Indian villager was
stripped of all 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 and
resultant cooperative relations
A new village came-where existence was based
on competition and struggle among independent
individuals.
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, Shroff, 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 RBIss 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
India was steadily becoming more
urbanized,
Significant portion of the Indian
population living in large or small
towns.
de-urbanization and de-industrialization of
India
This led to even greater pressures on
agriculture since large categories of highly
skilled artisans and non-agricultural workers
were thrown out of work.
When the British left, India had become a
village-based agricultural economy.
With an enormous population pressure on
agriculture and an adverse landman ratio of
about 0.92 acre per capita at independence.
Even in Villages, there was skilled
artisans like weavers, potters,
carpenters, metal-workers, painters
etc.
Trade tariffs and excise duties were set so as
to destroy Indian industries, and squeeze
domestic trade.
Bihar and Bengal: severe restrictions were
placed on the use of inland water-ways
causing fishing and inland shipping and
transportation to suffer.
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, artificial fertilizers, etc rare
some more points
Drain of
Wealth
Independent Farmer / tenant was hardly left with any money to re-investment in
agriculture. Most of his surplus income/profit went into paying taxes. These taxes were
used for exporting raw material from India to Britain. = Drain of wealth.
Social
Banditry
when individuals or small group of farmers couldnot organize a collective action against
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
intermediaries)
Owned 75% of fertile land
48% of villagers (tenants, sub-tenants)
Owned 25% of fertile land. (=imagine the land
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 Bengals 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 affect 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? Briefly discuss their
features and implications.
6. What do you understand by Commercialization of agriculture? Discuss its impact on rural
India.
[Land Reforms] Peasant Struggles 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 1857s Mutiny
1. Indigo Movement (1859-60)
2. Deccan Riots (1874-75)
3. Ramosi, 1877-87
4. No-Revenue Movements (1893-1900)
5. Birsa Mundas 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. 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 benefits
and limitations. Gandhi and Ranades views on Land reforms, All India Kisan Sabha etc.
4. Land reforms, After independence: abolition of Zamindari, Land Ceiling and Tenancy
reforms. Their benefits and limitations
5. Land reforms by non-governmental action: Bhoodan, Gramdan, NGOs etc. their benefits
and limitations
6. Land reforms in recent times: Computerization of land records, Forest rights Act, land reform
policy etc. their benefits and limitations.
Peasant struggles in British India
Can be classified into following groups:
Before 1857s
Mutiny
East India: Sanyasi Revolt, Chuar and Ho Rising, Kol Rising, Santhal
Rising, Pagal Panthis and Faraizis Revolt
West India: Bhil, Ramosis
South India: Poligars
After 1857s
Mutiny
Indigo Movement (1859-60)
Pabna Agrarian Unrest (1873-76),
Deccan riots (1874-75),
No-Revenue Movement Assam, Maharashtra, and Punjab: (towards the
end of 19th century)
Champaran Indigo Satyagraha (1917)
In the 20s and
30s
2
nd
Moplah, Awadh Kisan Sabha, Eka movement, Bardoli etc.
During and
After WW2
Congress Ministries in provinces such as Bihar, UP and Bombay (will be
discussed separately in third article)
Faizpur Congress session (1936)
All India Kisan Congress
Tebhaga Movement in Bengal
Telangana Outbreak in Hyderabad
Varlis Revolt in Western India
Peasant Revolts before 1857
Note: Im 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 fight 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 officials. Government banned shifting cultivation in forest areas.
Area: Raj Mahal hills
Leaders: Sindhu + Kanhu
Result: The government could pacified these Santhals by creating a separate district of
Santhal Parganas.
some other revolts before 1857s Mutiny:
Bhil
1817 to 1819
Reason: agrarian hardship
Area: W.Ghats, Khandesh
Chuar and Ho
1820 to 1837.
Reason: famine, land Revenue
Area: Midnapur, Chhotanagpur, Singhbhum
Tribes involved
Chuar=Midnapur
Ho and Munda= Chhota Nagpur and Singhbhum
Faraizis
1838 to 1857
Reason: Zamindari Oppression
Area: East Bengal
Leader: Faraizis were followers of a Muslim sect founded by Haji
Shariatullah of Faridpur
Kherwar/Sapha
Har
Against revenue settlements in tribal areas.
Kol
Reason: British transferred of land from Kol headmen (Mundas) to
outsiders like Sikh and Muslim farmers.
Area: Chhota Nagpur, Ranchi, Singhbhum, Hazaribag, Palamau and
western parts of Manbhum.
Mophah, First
uprising
1836-1854
Malabar.
by Muslim tenants against Hindu Zamindars (Jemnis).
Poligars
Reason: land Revenue
Area: Dindigul, Malabar, Arcot, Madras presidency
Tiru Mir
1782-1831
Bengal. Against Hindu land lords, who imposed beard tax on Farazis.
Revolts after 1857s Mutiny

General features:
1. After 1857s 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 didnt 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 notification 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
Mukherji
editor of Hindu patriot. published reports on indigo campaign, organized
mass 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 affairs and forced eviction. Nuisance of moneylenders.
Leaders: Ishwar Chandra Roy, Shambhu Pal, Khoodi Mollah.
Notable features
Agrarian league formed to fight 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 didnt 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.
Assam
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 Revenue.
Rural elites, Brahmin led the revolt. Social boycott of anyone who paid taxes to
British.
Bombay
farmers wanted revenue remission under famine code during 1896-1900.
Tilak, Poona Sarvajanik Sabha sent volunteers to spread awareness among
farmers about their legal rights under Famine code.
These campaigns spread to Surat, Nasik, Khera and Ahmedabad.
Punjab
Nuisance of moneylenders.
led to assault and murder of moneylenders by the peasants.
Result: Punjab Land Alienation Act of 1902 which prohibited for 20 years transfer
of land from peasants to moneylenders and mortgage.
Birsa Mundas 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 different 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 fines
1916 A farmer Raj Kumar Shukla contacted Gandhi during Congress Session @Lucknow.
1917
Mahatma Gandhi launched an agitation. Demanded a detailed enquiry and redressal of
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 officials 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

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 didnt demand abolition of rent, zamindari. They only wanted a fair system of land
tenancy.
Kisan Movement, UP (1920s)
Awadh farmers were suffering 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 benefiting middlemen and merchants at the
cost of the poor.
6. Farmers had to pay Larai Chanda (War contribution) during WW1.
7. To counter Gandhi/Congresss influence, 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.
1918
UP Kisan Sabha setup.
by Home Rule leaders Gauri Shanker Mishra and Indra Narain Dwivedi with the support of
Madan Mohan Malviya.
1920
Baba Ramchandra organized peasants of Awadh against the landlords, using Ramayana and
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.
o Tipping point: Police raided a mosque to arrest a Khilafat leader Ali Musaliar.
o Farmers attacked police stations, public offices and houses, land records of zamindars and
moneylenders under the leadership of Kunhammed Haji.
o For months, British government lost control over Ernad and Walluvanad taluks for several
months.
o This movement was termed as Anti-British, Anti-Zamindars and, to some extent, as anti-
Hindu.
o Podanur Blackhole: British put 66 Moplah prisoners into a railway wagon and completely shut
it down. They all died of asphyxiation.
o Result: Hundreds of Moplah lost lives- as a result they were completely demoralized and
didnt 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:
o not to pay Revenue, required them to take oath in the name of their respective
Hindu/Muslim gods.
o social boycott of anyone who paid revenue.
o Resist eviction and Jabti (Confiscation). Lock houses and migrate to Baroda State
o 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-Broomfield commission.
Reduced land Revenue to 6.03%
Returned confiscated 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 1937s 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
Bihar
Kisan ran campaign to abolish Zamindari, restore Bakshat lands. Matter
Solved when provincial congress government passed act.
Bihar Provincial Kisan Sabha, 1929
Bombay, Central
Provinces
Against forest grazing regulations
Hajong Tribals in Garo hills. to reduce rent from 50% to 25%. Leader Moni Singh.
Maharashtra, Karnataka,
Bundelkhand
No-Revenue movement
Malabar, Kerala
against feudal levies, advance rents and eviction. Result: Malabar
Tenancy act was amended.
Punjab
Punjab Riyasati Praja Mandal (1928)
Against Maharaj of Patiala he had increased land Revenue by
19%
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

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 didnt 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 1/3
rd
of crop produce.
3. Tebhaga movement aimed to implement this recommendation through mass struggle.
who
Bengal Provincial Kisan Sabha
communist groups
lower stratum of tenants such as bargardars (share croppers), adhiars and poor
peasants, tea plantation workers etc.
against
whom
zamindars, rich farmers (Jotedars), moneylenders, traders, local bureaucrats
Suharwardys Government introduced Bargardari Bill. But overall, Limited success:
1. Brutal police suppression.
2. difference of opinion
o tribal elements wanted more militant protest
o poor and middle level farmer support declined
o 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? Nizams officials, 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 Vinobas 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 difference. The class
war turned into petty murdering of forest officials and moneylenders. As a result movement
lost support.
Varli, Bombay Province
Varli=tribals in W.India.
Kisan Sabha supported them. Later under the influence of communists.
Against whom? forest-contractors, the moneylenders, the rich farmers, landlords, British
bureaucracy.
Mock Questions
5 marks
1. Pabna movement.
2. Indigo Movement (1859-60)
3. Deccan Riots (1874-75)
4. Sanyasi Revolt
5. Bardoli Peasant Movement (1921)
6. Indigo Movement (1959-60)
7. Pagal Panthis and Faraizis Revolt
8. Peasant Movement in Avadh
9. Baba Ramdev Chandra.
10. Eka Movement
11. Kheda Satyagraha
12. Ramosi Revolts
13. Birsa Mundas contribution in Freedom struggle
14. Tebhaga Movement
15. Telengana movement (1946-51)
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 Gandhis leadership
3. Write a note on Peasants movements under Sardar Patels 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?
Role of Indian Congress in Land reforms during the British Raj, Gandhis Views on Land
Reforms, All India Kisan Sabha
1. Prologue
2. #1: Congress 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. Gandhis Views on Land Reforms
6. Justice Ranades Views on Land reforms
7. Mock Question
Prologue
so far weve seen
1. Three land tenure system of the British: Their features, implications.
2. Peasant struggles for land reforms in British Raj: causes and consequences.
Now in this article well 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 different provinces (1937), what did they do?
2. What resolutions did they pass in various sessions?
+ additional topics: Gandhis views on Land reforms, Ranades 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
first
1. Madras
2. Bombay
3. Central Provinces
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 didnt 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, landlords maximum share was kept at 9/20 part of the produce.
12. if tenant doesnt 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 cant
evict familys farm if the father died.)
Rent of hereditary tenant can be changed only after 10 years.
Tenant cannot be arrested, if he doesnt 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 couldnt 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
Orissa
Passed: Tenancy act to reduced interest rate on arrears from 12.5 to 6% and provide for
free transfer of occupancy holdings.
Failed: bill to reduce rents in Zamindari areas. because governor didnt give assent.
Kerala
Congress Socialist Party and Communists had setup peasant associations
(Krishak Sangathan)
organized a campaign towards amendment of the Malabar Tenancy Act.
Andhra Congress ministry passed law to give debt relief to farmers
Bengal
agitations against Canal Tax
Hat Tola Movement: in north Bengal against a levy collected by the landlords
from peasants at Hat (weekly market).
Punjab Agitation against the Union Ministry dominated by landlords of western Punjab
for resettlement of land revenue and against increase in canal tax and water
rate.
Madras
Grazing fees reduced.
Debt Relief act: Reduced interest rate on debts to 6.25%
Committee under Revenue minister T.Prakasam, made recommendations to
reduce Zamindars 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
states
laws regulating the activity of the moneylenders and providing debt relief.
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
Zamindars income by 50-60%.
3. Appeasement: Had to maintain unity for anti-British struggle. so, could not afford 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 benefited 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

@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: Didnt include the demand to abolish Zamindari / Estates of landlords.
@Kisan Conference, 1935
President: Sardar Patel. passed resolution for:
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 sessions Agrarian reform program= repeating Karachi Sessions points +
some new demands from All India Kisan Sabhas 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 first Ryots association in Guntur, Andhra.
1928
Bihar Kisan Sabha formed by Swami Sahajanand Saraswati.
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. differences 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 efforts of regional Kisan
Sabhas/associations.
1
st
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)
Gandhis 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
o he asked tenants and landlors to join and fight against the most powerful zamindar-
the British.
o In the Ryotwari regions (where British directly collected taxes), Gandhi asked farmers
to stop paying revenue.
o 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,
o 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:
Gandhis demand Irwins response
wanted Irwin to return the land confiscated from farmers. And if such land was
sold to third parties then original farmer be paid some compensation.
didnt agree
reduce land revenue in all areas
agreed for only
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 zamindars lands and, while there could be some violence,
but the zamindars could also cooperate by fleeing.
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 fiscally impossible to compensate the landlords.
Justice Ranades Views on Land reforms
Once UPSC asked about Sir Tejbahadur Saprus views on Indian Nationalist. (2006) So similar to
thatWhat were Justice Ranades 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 find 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 Gandhis views on Land reforms.
2. Write a note on Justice Ranades views on Land reforms.
3. Write a note on Dr. Rajendra Prasads 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 find 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.
Post Independence: Abolition of Zamindari, Reasons, Impact, Obstacles, Limitations, First
Amendment
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 modification
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: Benefits/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 9
th
Schedule
Prologue
So far in the [Land Reform] series, weve seen:
1. Three land tenure system of the British: Their features, implications.
2. Peasant struggles for land reforms in British Raj: causes and consequences.
3. Land reforms, Before independence: by Congress governments in Provinces, their benefits
and limitations.
Now we look into land reform measures after the independence. But first, Lets once again recap the
meaning and importance of land reforms.
What is Land reform?
Agro productivity is affected by two type of factors:
INSTITUTIONAL
FACTORS
TECHNICAL FACTORS
1. land tenure system
2. size of land
holdings
3. land distribution
1. climate, soil, rainfall
2. farm mechanization
3. farming techniques: use of hybrid seeds, fertilizer, pesticides,
irrigation methods
Reforms related to ^institutional factors are called land reforms.
Lets check some more definitions
def1
Land Reforms is a planned and institutional reorganisation of the relation between man and
land
def2
Land Reforms mean deliberate change introduced into system of land tenure and the farming
structure
def3
Land reforms imply such institutional changes which turn over ownership of the farms to those
who actually till the soil, and which raise the size of the farm to make it operationally viable.
def4
Land reforms mean, such measures as, abolition of intermediaries, tenancy reforms, ceiling on
land holdings, consolidation and cooperative farming etc.
def5 Improving land tenure and institutions related to agriculture.
def6
redistribution of property rights
For the benefit of the landless poor.
def7
integrated program
to remove the barriers for economic and social development
Caused by deficiencies in the existing land tenure system.
Ya but why learn so many definition? Ans. UPSC may directly give you a definition 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 confined 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
first five year plan.
4. Define 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
revenue+ credit, marketing, abolition of intermediaries, etc.
Concerned only with land
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
o He doesnt own land=cant get loans through banks / formal institutions.
o He doesnt own land=why bother?
o 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.)
social justice
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.
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.
Economic
development
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
directly comes in contact with farmers. This direct relation will help in rural
Development and agri. Development as per five year plans.
1+2+3=long term economic development.
Improve
standard of
living
When,
1. agro production increased
2. social justice given
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 first 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 file application regarding how much land they owned in
Pakistan.
These claims were verified by village assemblies and each family was allotted proportional
land in Punjab. by 1950 this work was finished.
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 should be eliminated
aka Zamindari abolition. Covered in this article.
2. Maximum size of holding should
be fixed. The surplus land over
such a maximum should be
acquired and placed at the
disposal of the village
cooperatives.
aka Land ceiling. Covered in next article.
3. Present land revenue system to be
replaced by progressive
agricultural income tax.
Not covered in any article. because income from
agriculture is exempted from income tax. And therefore,
many filmstars use fake papers to claim they are
farmers. (and then they dance in Dawoods Party
@dubai, earn money, manipulate the account books to
show that cash coming from their agriculture income
and thus evade tax.)
4. All middlemen should be replaced
by non-profit making agencies,
such as cooperatives.
5. Pilot schemes for cooperative
farming among small land holders
aka Cooperative farming. Will be covered in future
article.
6. Consolidate small land holdings
and prevent further land
fragmentation.
Aka consolidation of land holdings. Will be covered in
future article.
Lets start with Land Reform Method #1: Zamindari Abolition. But first question:
Why Abolish Zamindari?
in the first article under [Land reform], we saw the three land tenure system of British-
Zamindari, Ryotwari and Mahalwari.
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 todays Middleman @APMC Mandi that we saw under [Food processing]
article series.
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 Indias 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 didnt allow others to freely access them.
4. Because Art.48 wanted to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern-scientific
lines but Zamindars were orthodox rent-seeking mindset, and tenant farmer had neither the
money nor the motivation to scientific farming.
5. Because First Five year plan also asked for abolition of intermediaries/zamindars to increase
agro. Production, farmers income, to provide social justice and move towards an egalitarian
society.
First Amendment, 1951
You already know that First amendment =>9
th
schedule, whatever laws listed this schedule,
courts cannot inquire into them. But first Amendment is not just about 9
th
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 fix it.
Similarly, Constitution came into force from January 1950. But from January 1950 to May
1951 (=~15 months), government realized variety of deficiencies/problems with Constitution.
So, cameup with First amendment to fix 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 were 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 fix this inconsistency with Art.15.
After the 1
st
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
before
Amendment
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
caste/religion/person/nation, he could not be convicted.
What if an ACIO leaked national security related data to a journalist? Both
could still claim immunity on the grounds of freedom of speech.
after
State can make law to put reasonable restriction on freedom of speech, with
respect to:
1. National security
2. friendly relations with foreign countries
3. public order, decency or morality
4. contempt of court
5. Defamation or incitement to an offence.
#3 Freedom of Profession
BEFORE 1
ST
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 1
ST
AMENDMENT
1. The State CAN make laws to prescribe professional or technical qualifications 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 1
ST
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 were not given fair compensation etc.
Hence Union government came up with provisions to prevent courts from entertaining such
pleas.
AFTER 1
ST
AMENDMENT
Added three things to the constitution
1. two new articles (31 A and B)
2. one schedule (9
th
Schedule)
Art 31A:
State can make laws to acquire any estates / rights related to estates.
Estate =also includes any jagir, inam or muafi 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 9
th
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
9
th
Schedule.
9
th
Schedule:
The first Amendment act listed 13 acts and regulations in 9
th
schedule. all meant for
abolishing Zamindari. Meaning Zamindars could not approach courts against those laws.
(boring list given @bottom of this current article)
Later 14
th
Amendment, 34
th
Amendment etc. also added more laws related to land reforms in
this 9
th
Schedule. You can read more about them in Laxmikanths appendix for constitutional
amendments.
#4 Minor modification
A few minor amendments in respect of articles 341, 342, 372 and 376.
Anyways we digressed much from the Zamindari abolition topic so lets come back.
So far weve 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 first amendment 1951
o modified freedom of speech
o modified freedom of profession
o Protected Zamindari abolition/law reform laws via Art 31A, 31B and 9
th
Schedule.
Now lets 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. Different states have different provisions. But lets 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 fiscal deficit angle!)
State Compensation to Zamindar
Jammu
Kashmir
No compensation paid to them. And this also led to Hindu-Muslim bitterness because
Almost all Zamindars were Hindu (in Jammu region).
Uttar
Pradesh
Compensation according to Zamindars income.
Small Zamindar= Annual income times 20
Big Zamindar= Annual income times (2 or 4)
In other words- compensation formula inversely related to Zamindars 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
o charged fees from villagers, if they wanted to use it.
o 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.
#3: Ownership
transfer
Bhumidhar=tenant farmers, who cultivated Zamindars land.
In Uttar Pradesh, Bhumidhar can become owner of the land after
paying 10 times the annual rent to his Zamindar.
#4: Personal
Cultivation
Land which was cultivated by the zamindar himself = exempted from
purview of these acts. Zamindar was permitted to keep this land.
#5: Direct payment
of land revenue
Now Farmer was made directly liable for paying land revenue to the state
government. (Because Zamindar is no longer the middleman in 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 effectiveness of these legislations.
^to understand this, lets check the #Epicfail of Bihar:
1946 Bihar government passed resolution to abolish Zamindari.
1949
Act was passed State assembly but landlords approached the courts and the government too
felt it necessary to repeal the legislation.
1950
State legislature passed New Act, with some amendments. But Zamindars again approached
courts.
1951
Union government brings 1
st
Amendment, gives immunity to all such Zamindari abolition acts/
regulations from judicial review.
But Even, after the law was finally implemented, the Zamindars refused to cooperate with the revenue
authorities and tried all means to scuttle it implementation. The petty revenue officials 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
definition 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 beneficiaries 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 significance 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, lets check some positive points:
Zamindari Abolition: Benefits/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 fullfilled (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.
neither the zamindars, nor the
cultivators took interest in
1. Cultivators have got ownership rights and hence take
keen interest in land improvement and increase in
agriculture production.
improvememt of agriculture land 2. Government created an enabling atmosphere- agri.
cooperative society, regional rural banks etc. to provide
cheap credit. Subsidy on fertilizers, cheap electricity,
irrigation etc.
=DPSP Art. 48 fullfilled (modern and scientific 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 fullfilled.
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
Zamindars as personal property, have been declared as community property. =DPSP Art. 39
full filled (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 fullfilled. (securing a social order, minimize inequality of income, status,
facilities and opportunities.)
#5: Rise of middleclass
Since the intermediaries were removed=>farmers dont have to pay heavy rent=>these
farmers could generate profit=>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 signification 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 didnt really benefit the marginalized sections of rural society?
4. Explain how Zamindari abolition helped fullfilling 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 confined 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
first five year plan.
11. Define Land reforms. Examine its role in removing the barriers for economic and social
development in India.
In the next article, well the second measure of land reform: Land Ceilings.
Appendix: the 9
th
Schedule
the first amendment had added 13 laws in the 9
th
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).
Ceiling on Land holdings: Reasons, Impact, Obstacles, Limitations, Achievements
1. Prologue
2. What is Ceiling on Land Holdings?
3. Why Ceiling on Land holdings?
4. Land Ceiling in India
5. Ceiling Phase 1: Freedom to 1972
6. 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
7. Second stage: 1972 onwards
8. 34
th
Amendment
9. 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
10. Land Ceilings: Benefits/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
11. Land Ceiling: Pro and Anti arguments
12. Mock Questions
Prologue
So far weve seen
1. Three land tenure system of the British:
Their features, implications.
How the British had difficulty learning the land
Revenue system of Desi Nawabs. So, they
came up with Permanent settlement, Ryotwari
and Mahalwari systems.
2. Peasant struggles for land reforms in British
Raj: causes and consequences.
But the British tenure systems caused much
pain and anguish among Indian peasants and
led to numerous revolts.
3. Land reforms, Before independence: by
Congress governments in Provinces, their
benefits and limitations.
After the Provincial elections of 1937,
Congress ministries took measures to protect
tenant farmers. But by and large shied away
from zamindari abolition.
4. Land reforms, After independence: Abolition
of Zamindari, Reasons, Impact, Obstacles,
Limitations.
After freedom, State Governments enacted
Zamindari Abolition Acts. As a result erstwhile
(superior) tenants became virtual owners of
their land. =>This is First tool of Land 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 lets again recap the players in a tenancy system
What is Ceiling on Land Holdings?
It means fixing 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- theyll lease it to small farmers (tenants).
Small farmer (tenant) doesnt have any motivation to work harder because he doesnt 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. Well see their
anti-land ceiling arguments at the end of this article. But for the moment, lets continue with the
assumption that land ceiling is beneficial.
Land Ceiling in India
WE can study it in two phases:
1. From independence to 1972
2. After 1972
Ceiling Phase 1: Freedom to 1972
1946
(just before freedom) All India Kisan Sabha demanded a maximum limit of landownership of
25 acres per landholder
1947
Economic Program committee headed by Nehru, Recommended, The maximum size of
holdings should be fixed. The surplus land over such a maximum should be acquired and
placed at the disposal of the village
1949
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.
An economic holding was defined 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.
First
FYP
There should be an upper limit to the amount of land that an individual may hold.
Exact upper limit was to be fixed by each State, having regard to its own agrarian
history and present problems.
1953
AICC Agra session: State Governments should take immediate for the fixation of
ceilings on land holdings, with a view to redistribute the land,
1957
National Development Council (NDC) adopted a decision to complete the imposition
of ceilings by the end of 1960.
1959
Nagpur session of Congress. Passed resolution that
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 fix 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:
Classification of land What to do here?
1. Land held by Tenants (i.e. after
Zamindari abolition, these Tenants
who had become virtual owners of
the land.)
1. States had to make law, thatll enable Tenant
to take over this land with patta (i.e.
document showing possession).
2. Subject to maximum land ceiling in acres. i.e.
surplus land from tenant will be taken away.
2. Land held by Landowner himself
3. Owner could keep part of this land for his
personal cultivation (subject to maximum
land ceiling in acres)
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 of
1961
most states passed land ceiling Acts
by the end of
1970
Not a single acre was declared surplus in large states like Bihar, Mysore,
Kerala, Orissa and Rajasthan!
In Andhra Pradesh, a mere 1,400 acres was declared surplus but no land was
distributed.
by the end of
1970
Overall India: only 2.4 million acre declared surplus. Barely 50% of that
surplus land was redistributed among landless.
This amounted to ~0.3% of total cultivated land of India in that era.
So why did this happen? Why didnt 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 five 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 definition 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 fixed
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
2
nd
Five year plan recommended following categories of land be exempted from ceiling laws:
1. tea, coffee and rubber plantations, orchards,
2. specialized farms engaged in cattle breeding, dairying, wool raising, etc.,
3. sugarcane farms operated by sugar factories
4. Efficiently managed farms on which heavy investments had been made.
5. Land belonging to charitable trusts.
2
nd
Five year plans 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. Efficiently managed farm was vaguely defined. So many farmers evaded the ceilings by
simply getting themselves declared efficient.
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 officials, 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 Efficient 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 governments
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
o using their vote bank clout over political parties at state level=bills passed with lot of
delay.
o conniving with petty revenue official at village and tehsil level to transfer land to family
members and benami persons to avoid ceiling
o filling flimsy 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 first phase: 1947-1972, land ceiling is epicfail. Now lets check
the second phase:
Second stage: 1972 onwards
1970: Indira Gandhi says following
The land reform measures implemented have failed to match the legitimate expectations which were
first 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, first priority to landless agricultural workers, particularly
SC/ST.
4. Land owner will be compensated for his surplus land- but this compensation will be fixed
below market price (so that new owner i.e. landless laborer can afford 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 fixed
States
Ceiling fixed
(in hectares)
(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 filling court cases on flimsy ground. In Andhra
Pradesh alone ~500,000 pending cases pertaining to land ceiling were filed!
34
th
Amendment
Since rich farmers continued to evade land ceiling by flimsy courtcases, the Union
government came up with 34
th
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
80s
~2 million acres land redistributed (but rich farmers wilfully dispersed more than 30 million
acre land to avoid ceilings)
1885 ~4 million acres land redistributed.
So far weve 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 lets 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 defined family in a liberal manner and allowed a large number of exemptions.
2. When ceiling came in effect, Zamindars connived with local officials. 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 Beneficiary 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 finally 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 fictitious persons,
manipulating land records and reclassifying land under different 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 didnt 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
fit for cultivation.
Lack of Structural changes @village (education, transport, healthcare etc.)
Many a times, even after a landless get land, he doesnt 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 elses 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 efforts 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= insufficient. It must be implemented with full vigor and efficiency.
During this era (60-70s), the small/marginal farmers or Landless labourers are not organized
politically. 73
rd
Amendment for Panchayati Raj is not even passed yet.
So, there was no pressure/compulsion on district-tehsil level officials to perform efficiently.
They were corrupt and inefficient as ever.
FYP did not give direction
First Five Year Plan identified small and uneconomic holdings as the root cause of many
difficulties 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 five year=gave the concept of exempted categories of land (tea plantation, efficiently
managed farms etc.) and we saw how this exemption was misused.
Third and Fourth Plans=War, stoppage of aid, famine, food-insecurity, fiscal deficit 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 fifth five year plan (74-79) there is emergency, Indira-Hatao, Morarji
trying to hold a coalition government => land ceiling reform did not figure in priorities- be it
planning, policies, legislation or grassroot mobilization of peasants.
6
th
FYP onwards (80s), the focus shifts to poverty removal, self-employment, watershed etc.
and land ceiling became as obsolete to five year planning, as Vivek Mushran, Rahul Roy and
Kumar Gaurav are for todays Bollywood.
Land fragmentation=Low GDP
Between 85-92, number of beneficiaries increased more than the increase in area
distributed=> new beneficiaries 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 financially
rewarding non-agro job e.g. factory worker, rickshaw driver etc. But that did not happen
because other rich farmers couldnt 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 doesnt
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
o Itll increase land fragmentation. Small sized farmers= lower economies of scale,
mechanization not possible=lower productivity
o Itll 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.
Anyways, enough of negative points about land ceiling. Lets check some positive points
Land Ceilings: Benefits/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 testified 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
effect on agricultural production.
5. Atleast some of the Land owners shifted to direct efficient farming in order to get exemption
from land ceiling.
Employment
increased
1. Landless laborer= gets employment only during sowing and harvesting
season but now he given land ownership = he is 24/7 self-employed
farmer.
2. Even if he did not get land, still other farmers got land=> more demand
for agri.labourers= wage bargaining power increased.
3. In other words, land ceiling increased employment opportunities.
Naxal reduced
1. With reduction in inequality among the villagers, possibility of class
struggle will be minimised.
2. They will live with perfect peace and harmony and not join
Maoists/Naxals movements any longer. (atleast in theory)
Social Justice
3. In a rural economy, whoever controls land, controls the power.
4. Land ceiling Reduced this power inequality among villagers.
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
1977
BLD was major component of Janta Government under the great Morarji Desai who defeated
Indira Gandhi.
Thus, in a way land ceiling helped destroying Congress monopoly / One party rule in Indian politics.
Land Ceiling: Pro and Anti arguments
Like I said in the middle of the article- the economists believing in free market / capitalism- they dont
like land ceiling. So lets hear their arguments
Anti-Land Ceiling Pro Land Ceiling
Land ceiling should be abolished.
even corporate sector should be
allowed to buy agri. land.
This will enable the enterprising
farmer to enlarge his holding by
buying or leasing lands of small
farmers.
Although landlessness will increase
but these small farmers could find
employment in agri. and allied sector
as a result of capitalist mode of
Agricultural income= exempted from income
tax.
So, if land ceilings are removed, the rich
people will rush to buy farm land.
Thus land prices will soar. A new
intermediary group of Agri.land mafia will
emerge.
But millions of small and marginal farmers
will be pushed off their land.
Hence, the time is not yet ripe to bring forth
such drastic reforms (of removing land
production. ceilings).
Capitalist mode of agriculture=>more
surplus income=> invested back into
the agriculture=economic growth.
if corporate sector is allowed to enter
in agriculture=> Agri. exports will
increase=>more foreign exchange
incoming=>Current Account deficit
gone, rupee will strengthen.
Capitalist mode of agriculture uses more
machines, less laborers=>unemployment
increased.
Yes, Economic growth will be achieved but
at the cost of unemployment and
subsequent fall in human development.
small farms are not productive
because they hinder mechanised
farming
Small farmers have limited capital to
invest in improving agro. Production.
large farms tend to prefer monoculture
(single crop), because they can be easily
managed with heavy machinery. = more
susceptible to pest attacks, not good from
soil fertility point of view.
Small farmers usually have mixed crops
(intercropping), they combine and rotate
crops and livestock, with manure => soil
fertility improves.
Land ceiling and distribution =>
poverty and disguised unemployment
continues.
Some people need to be shifted from
agricultural sector to
manufacturing/service sector. There is
no need to give land to each and
every landless person.
Villagers should be kept self-employed,
even if on small and marginal farms.
This fits with Gandhian ideas of village
republics.
In the next article, well see the third measure of land reform= Tenancy reform acts.
Mock Questions
12 marks:
1. Land ceiling is more of an impediment than a catalyst for economic growth. Comment
2. Evaluate the significance 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. Evaluate the Impact of land Ceiling and distribution of surplus land on rural power structure
post-independence.
5. Examine the reasons behind dismal performance of land ceiling reforms in India.
6. Define Land ceiling. Why was it necessary to enact land ceiling acts in post-independent
India?
7. Write a note on the land ceiling reforms before 1972. Why were they unsuccessful?
8. Briefly comment on the progress of ceiling on land holdings in India.
Tenancy Reform, Tenancy protection Acts in India, features, benefits, obstacles, limitations,
impact, evaluation
1. Prologue
2. Land Reform Tool #3: Tenancy Reforms
1. Element1: Landowners right to lease
2. Element2: Landowners right to Personal Cultivation
3. Element3: Tenants right against eviction & high rent
4. Element4: Tenants right to surrender
5. Element5: Tenants Right to ownership
6. Misc. rights to Tenants
3. Tenancy Reforms: Obstacles/Limitations
1. #1: Women did not benefit
2. #2: SC/ST did not benefit
3. #3: Green Revolution=land grabbing
4. #4: Personal Cultivation
4. Tenancy Reforms: Benefits
1. #1: Rise of New Politics
2. #2: Social Justice
3. #3: More investment
5. 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
6. Land reforms: Overall Positive
7. Mock Questions
Prologue
1. Three land tenure system of the
British: Their features,
implications.
How the British had difficulty learning the land Revenue
system of Desi Nawabs. So, they came up with
Permanent settlement (Zamindari), Ryotwari and
Mahalwari systems.
2. Peasant struggles for land
reforms in British Raj: causes and
consequences.
But the British tenure systems caused much pain and
anguish among Indian peasants and led to numerous
revolts.
3. Land reforms, Before
independence: by Congress
governments in Provinces, their
benefits and limitations.
After the Provincial elections of 1937, Congress
ministries took measures to protect tenant farmers. But
by and large they shied away from zamindari abolition.
4. Land reforms, After
independence: Abolition of
Zamindari, Reasons, Impact,
Obstacles, Limitations.
After freedom, State Governments enacted Zamindari
Abolition Acts. As a result erstwhile (superior) tenants
became virtual owners of their land. =>This is First
tool of Land reform.
5. Ceiling on Land holdings:
Reasons, Impact, Obstacles,
After abolition of Zamindari, the (superior) tenant
farmers became virtual owners of the land. They
owned tens and hundreds of acres of land. While
Limitations, Achievements other peasants owned hardly any land.
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 five elements: two for land owners + three for tenants
but first, lets once again check the players in a tenancy system, to get a better grip over this
tenure/tenancy reform acts:
The State
1. enforces tenancy contracts
2. Maintains law and order.
Earns revenue for doing 1+2
Owner
The owner: the guy who owns land
They pay Revenue to the State.
Rich farmers, Zamindars etc. own hundreds of acres of land. Cant cultivate it
on their own.
Similarly minors, disabled, widows, soldiers, fishermen may also own land but
they cant cultivate for one reason or another.
So these people lease their land to other farmers (tenants).
Superior
tenants
They cultivate on land leased from the ^owner.
These are hereditary tenants. Meaning they cultivate same land generation
after generation.
They pay rent to the owner.
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.
Inferior
Tenants
Other names: tenants at will, subordinate tenants, temporary tenants,
subtenants.
They till the land leased from other tenants/owners.
They pay rent to the owners/superior tenants.
They have limited rights over the land.
They cannot sell or mortgage the land.
They can be evicted easily.
Share
croppers
Sharecroppers= cultivate other persons 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
They have no rights whatsoever on the land.
They cannot sell, rent or mortgage the land.
Can be evicted easily.
Landless
laborers
1. They get paid in cash or kind by the owners (or tenants)
2. Sometimes work under begari/bonded labour.
Tenacy reform acts by and large protect only superior and inferior tenant. Sharecroppers/Laborers get
nothing. Anyways, lets check the salient features of such Acts in various states:

Element1: Landowners right to lease
You own land, but you dont 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 dont 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.
Lets check some examples
Tenancy
Reform Act in
Provisions (may be outdated)
Andhra
Two types of leasing are practiced.
In the Andhra region: leasing is permitted
In Telengana region: large landholdings cannot be leased, but small
holdings can be leased
Assam
Land can be leased in future
But sub-leasing forbidden. (meaning tenant cannot lease the land further to third
party)
Bihar
In Future, agri.land cannot be leased except when owner is a person with
disabilities.
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.
Himachal
Agri land cannot be leased. Except when landowner is a minor or unmarried or a
widow or divorcee or disabled or defense personnel.
Karnataka Agri.Land cannot be leased except when landowner is seaman or soldier.
Madhya
Pradesh
No ban on future lease, but all the past leases have been abolished- to remove
the nuisance of Zamindar/Jagirdar in Malwa, Gwalior, Indore and Vindhya
Pradesh
Orissa Doesnt allow leasing or sub leasing of land
Rajasthan
yes, owner can lease the land to Tenant (5 years)
Tenant can further lease the land to sub-tenant (1 year)
Uttar Pradesh
Agri. cannot be leased. Except when landowners are widows, unmarried women,
military persons, students and disabled persons.
West Bengal Leasing is prohibited, but share-cropping is allowed with some restrictions.
Element2: Landowners 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. lets check:
State Law
Can Landowner take back land from
Tenant, for personal cultivation?
Andhra
Yes but not more than 75% of the
leased land.
Bihar
50% of landholding or 5 acre,
whichever is less
Bengal
50% of landholding or 2.5 acre,
whichever is less
Kerala, Orissa, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Yes but not more than 50% of the
Maharashtra, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, Manipur,
Tripura
leased land.
Uttar Pradesh
No, landowners cannot take back land
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 lets check the rights of tenants.
Element3: Tenants 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 fixed term and fixed 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 affects 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, lets check with examples:
Assam
Landowner cannot evacuate tenant, IF that tenant has been tilling the land for 3 years
or more.
Manipur
A tenant could not be removed from a minimum area of 1.2 acres of the land, until he
is given an alternative land.
Orissa
tenants who is lawfully cultivating any land cannot be removed.
Fixed tenure for half of the area held by Tenant
Rajasthan
yes, to both tenants and sub-tenants are given term security: (5 years and 1
year respectively)
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.
Tamilnadu
Landowner cannot evict the tenant except
1. If he wants to resume personal cultivation.
2. tenant is not paying rent
West
Bengal
tenant and Sharecroppers (bargadars) cannot be evicted, except
They stop cultivating land.
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=>cant buy hybrid seeds, fertilizers,
pesticides, machinery, in short he cannot invest in agri.improvement.
Therefore, after freedom, most state government passed laws to fix maximum rent in the
range of 25-33% of the produce.
state
maximum rent that an owner can charge
from tenant
Punjab, Haryana, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh
(coastal areas)
33-40% of the gross agri.produce
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 fixed 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 officials failed to enforce the rent limits.
6
th
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 1/4
th
of the
produce. While Sharecropper (Bargadar) gets 75% or 3/4
th
of the produce.
gave security of tenure: permanent and heritable
Element4: Tenants 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 different 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 verification 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 Tenants family and
order him not to complaint to Tehsildar.
4
th
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 weve learned
1. Owners right to lease
2. Owners right to personal cultivation
3. tenants right against eviction
4. tenants right to surrender
Now to the fifth and final element under Land Tenancy reform acts:
Element5: Tenants Right to ownership
Many state laws permit tenant to acquire the land IF he pays 10-20-50times the annual rent to the
landowner. Lets check:
States that permitted tenants to acquire
land after paying money to original landlord
Bombay (now Mahrashtra+Gujarat), Uttar Pradesh,
Madhya Pradesh, Hyderabad, Mysore and Delhi
States that permitted tenants to acquire
land without paying money to original
landlord
Assam, West Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, Bhopal and
Vindhya Pradesh
States reduced rent of the tenants without
giving them ownership rights
Andhra, Madras, Rajasthan, Saurashtra, Madhya
Bharat, Hyderabad (jagir areas) and Ajmer
Lets check some specific provisions of Tenants right to acquire/purchase land
Andhra Tenant can buy after paying 8 times the annual rent.
Bihar
If Tenant cultivated the land continuously for 12 years, can acquire right of
occupancy from the landowners
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.
Gujarat
Tenant has right to buy land, if he had been tilling continuously for 1 year. But he
has 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
benefit)
Madhya
Pradesh
Yes, if tenant pays 15 times the annual rent to the owner.
Maharashtra
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 50%)
Challenge: Many tenants could not afford 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.
Tamilnadu
Government Abolished intermediaries but did not facilitate tenants to purchase land
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 didnt 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/flood/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)
Tenancy Reforms: Obstacles/Limitations
1. Land reform delayed, is land reform denied: The inordinate delays in law
making=>Landowners evicted potential beneficiaries (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: Didnt provide security to tenure to all tenants. Only the upper stratum of the
farmers who had the knowledge and means to fight court cases, benefited from these laws.
5. Sharecroppers did not benefit: In many state laws, Sharecroppers dont enjoy same rights
as a tenant. Therefore, landowners converted tenants into sharecroppers.
#1: Women did not benefit
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-off brothers or brothers-
in-law.
3. Women have no bargaining power
o @household decision making
o @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 benefit
Recall the hierarchy of players in a tenancy system: landowner=>superior tenant =>inferior
tenant=>sharecropper=>landless laborers.
Major beneficiaries 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
significant.
Landowners- large, medium, small or marginal- all vehemently resisters tenancy reforms. No
political party could dare to lose their vote bank. Hence Tenancy reforms didnt 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 profitable, 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 theyll 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 profitable 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 field, was
confusing and subject to multiple interpretations.
Does personal cultivation mean he himself has to plough the field? or can he hire a landless
labourer for ploughing and irrigation? .. Concept was vaguely defined, there were no
definite 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, lets check some positive points:
Tenancy Reforms: Benefits
#1: Rise of New Politics
After freedom but before land reforms (50-60s) After land reforms (60-70-80s)
The political process dominated by
the client patron model.
In this model, the rural elite (upper caste)
would persuade or force the lower caste
villagers to vote for their (upper caste)
leader.
Hence political parties mainly focused on
pleasing those rural elite. And did not care
much for SC/ST/OBC
Paved the way for the rise of new
political forces in the country.
Particularly Superior Tenants / Bullock
Capitalists / middle Shudra
castes (=Yadav, Jat and Ahir)
Tenancy reforms+Green revolution=
gave them money power and freedom
to assert themselves politically.
First they became a pressure group,
later a political group
No government could afford 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
Upper castes owned most of the land In
Village.
While the lower castes lived as tenants and
agriculture labourers.
This Landlessness and insecure tenancies
forced the majority of the rural population to
be dependent on the upper caste=>often
lead to exploitation.
These laws gave the lower castes
the security of tenure over farmland
+land ceiling+zamindari abolition+
Panchayati Raj reforms.
Result: Influence/domination of upper
caste declined in village power
structure
Thus, Constitutions 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
Lets check their overall impact: negative+positive.
Land Reforms: Overall Negative
Jurisdiction
Land is a State subject under the Constitution=> different States have evolved differently in
the field 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 different states.
Even in the same state- different regions show different rate of progress.
UN report says: In India there seems to be great inequality in different 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
officials 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 different 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 field 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 different 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, staff-salary, electricity etc.)= higher than the
actual cash received under land revenue. Therefore, many states dont even bother
collecting land Revenue.
Land revenue administration falls under non-plan expenditure = doesnt get much budgetary
allocation.
As a result, administration suffers because department wont hire many officers/employees,
wont bother building new offices, buying new photocopiers, GPS survey devices, jeeps etc.
In many places, Village accountants dont have a separate office. Lack of photocopiers,
computers= land records not maintained properly.
Many Tahsildars didnt 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 suffer.
Bureaucratic apathy
officers live in
cities
Today, many patwaris, village officers, Mandal officers, revenue inspectors
etc. have settled in small towns/cities with their families. They sign files
from home, run office through phone and rarely visit the villages.
They write inquire reports without doing spot inspections in village.
Villagers have to visit town to get their problem resolved=costly affair.
Land mafia 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 office for various purposes.
bogus training
Revenue officers are trained better in court procedures than in dispute-
resolution in a humane manner.
Hence they give more emphasis on form rather than content, on letter
rather than spirit.
They rely on documents, stamp papers, affidavits but dont bother to make
field visit, talk with people to find the ground reality.
Changed
focus
Today, District officers (namely DM & SDM) mainly focused on
Conversion of Agri-land into industrial land
SEZ/industrialization related matter
law and order maintenance
How to chow down money from MNREGA, IAY etc. (or prevent it)
Hence, land reform programs=low priority for senior officers @District level. They
tend to ignore the Tehsildar/Patwaris inefficiency/corruption.
Tarikh pe
Tarik
Because of above reasons: a villager cannot get problem solved through
village/tehsil level officer. He has to approach the court. But
1. Majority of revenue courts continue to function in English language, but
villagers dont know English.
2. Revenue Courts already choked with thousands of cases related to land.
Poor litigant cannot afford making trips and hiring lawyers
Result? In most cases poor litigant will compromise with the land mafia/rich
farmer/ex-zamindar or just stop pursuing the matter.
no
coordination
Many state departments keep their own land-database e.g. Agriculture, drinking
water, irrigation, animal husbandry, forest etc. But there is no linkage amongst
these different 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 indifferent 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 dont have sufficient revenue sources of their own.
Money flow: 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 influence
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 dont 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 mafia.
All these factors further helped the Maoists to recruit more cadres from villages. District officials dont
goto Maoist affected 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
benefittd.
4. (but) A majority of the agricultural laborers =politically unorganized=could not benefit 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 didnt allot significant 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 fields;
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. fixed rent in the range of 25-33%
6. Without use of violence.
7. The cumulative effect of abolition of zamindari, tenancy legislation and ceiling legislation=
motivated the cultivators toinvest and improve agricultural practices.
8. Even though these land reforms were met with limited success, they made a significant
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 effort 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 influence of the dominant sections
of the society. Counter-argument: Impact was not so significant 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
12/15 marks
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 benefited from the land reforms. For the
Landless, land reform remains an unfinished 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.
Bhoodan, Gramdan, Jan Satyagraha 2012 & other Non Governmental Movements:
Achievements, obstacles, limitations
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: Benefits
4. Pardi Satyagraha, Gujarat, 50s
5. Great Land Struggle, 1970s
6. Land for Tillers Freedom (LAFTI), Tamil Nadu, 80s
7. Land Satyagraha, Chattisgarh, late 80s
8. Bhu-Adhikar Abhiyan, MP, 1996
9. Janadesh, 2007
10. 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?
11. Mock Questions
Prologue
So far weve 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, well check some peoples/NGO/Civil society movements for land reforms in
India. Their achievements/limitations. by the Naxalbari related matter ignored here. Youll find
neat coverage ot it under September competition under internal security folder click me
In the next article well come back to government actions: cooperative farming, consolidation
of land holdings and computerization of records.

@Mains 2013 Players: If running out of time and find this article too lengthy then just read
Bhoodan+Gramdan+directly Jan Satyagraha 2012 and skip the topics in between.
Bhoodan Movement (Donation of Land)
1951
First Bhoodan in village Pochampalli, Nalgonda District, Andhra (the hotbed of Telengana
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
beneficiaries and land fertility.
7. First preference given to landless agricultural laborers, then to farmers with insufficient land.
8. A date was fixed, entire village gathered and the beneficiary 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 certificates of having received land.
10. No fees charged from the beneficiary.
11. Beneficiary 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-official. 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
o the Bhoodan and Gramdan movement stimulated political and other activity by the
peasant masses
o has created a favourable atmosphere for political propaganda and agitation
o for redistribution of the land
o for abolition of private ownership of land
o for the development of agricultural producers cooperatives.
Bhoodan: Obstacles, Limitations, Problems
Slow progress
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)
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.
Bribes
village leaders, or allotting authorities, demanded money from the poor for
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.
Greed
Bhoodan movement created land hunger among landless.Some of them applied
multiple times in the name of wives, children etc. to get more and more free land.
Donating bogus
land
big landlords donated those land which were unfit for cultivation (or under court
litigation). Such donations served no real purpose.
Disputed land
Sometimes Bhoodan workers would even accept disputed land as gift.
Without verification.
Later the Matter would be stuck in court litigations and beneficiary would
get nothing.
Politicization
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 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.
Bribes
Since Bhoodan workers became political agents, Some landlords / Ex-
Zamindars donated land as bribe to Bhoodan workers- with hope of
getting favourable returns e.g. ticket in local election, road-contracts,
building contracts etc.
And if they (landlords) were not given such favours- theyd forcibly take
back the Bhoodan land from the beneficiary later on.
Support
Mere allotment of land=insufficient. Because landless farmer also needed
seeds, fertilizer, irrigation etc.
Often the beneficiary couldnt arrange loans for these inputs.
bureaucratic
apathy
District officials were slow and inefficient in finishing the formalities of
Bhoodan land transfers.
donated land remained idle for a number of years and the revenue for it
had to be paid by the donor.
Fragmentation
1. The average size of land given to beneficiary=0.5 to 3 acres.
2. Result: land fragmentation + diseconomies of scale + disguised
unemployment without any noticeable rise in agro-production.
Marxist Criticism
3. Bhoodans main purpose was to serve as a brake on the revolutionary
struggle of the peasants
4. Thus idea of Bhoodan= reactionary, class collaborationist.
Missed the
bigger picture
5. Bhoodan based on Gandhian idea of trusteeship. Some Socialists
wanted this movement to realize the potential of trusteeship and launch
mass civil disobedience against injustice.
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, Vinobas 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 defined as an experiment in collective village living.
2. Original idea comes from Gandhis 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 fifteen 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 ratified by the Council.
In other words, Gramdan=A Gram Sabha like institution collectively owned and managed entire
land/farms of the villagers.
Gramdan: Benefits
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, inefficient cultivation, distribution
of poverty, decline in marketable surplus , donation of
uncultivable land, legal and other difficulties of
redistribution, etc.
Nope
Nope Economies of scale
Benefits only the person who gets the land
Sarvodaya of entire village. Everyone
benefits.
Nope
possible to correlate with economic
planning in the country.
2nd FYP recognized that Gramdan
village have great significance for
co-operative village development.
Limitation of Gramdan? Gramdan was successful mainly in villages where class differentiation had
not yet emerged and there was little if any disparity in ownership of land or other property. E.g. Tribal
villages. But didnt find cooperation from other villages in the plains or villages near urban centers.
Pardi Satyagraha, Gujarat, 50s
WHO
1. Socialist workers: Iswarbhai Desai, Ashok Mehta.
2. Kisan Panchayat: a non-political body with no affiliation 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 profitably 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 profit with almost none investment or efforts.
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 fulfilling 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 effective 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 snails pace.
Great Land Struggle, 1970s
WHEN 1970s
WHO?
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 the towns
Trade unions and students, the youth and the womens organizations came forward
and directly participated in the struggle.
TYPE militant mass movement
WHY?
to highlight the fact that land is concentrated in the hands of a few landlords, former
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 fight for full ownership of land
4. Tenants fight to reduce rent
5. Tribals fight for tribal land grabbed by forest contractors and moneylenders from the plains.
6. Urban poors fight for vacant land for housing
7. Everyone fight to get radical amendments to the present ceiling laws and distribution of
surplus land.
TWO PHASES:
PHASE What Who?
JULY, 1970
Occupying government land and
forest land
all the states, except Andhra Pradesh, Tamil
Nadu, Manipur and J & K,
AUGUST,
1970
Occupying huge farms of landlords,
former princes, Monopolists like Birlas
etc.
all states, except Assam (due to heavy flood)
and Kerala (due to Mid-term election)
participated.
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 figures & plans to
distribute wasteland among the poor.
3. For the first 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 offering 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 five 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 mafia, landlords,
bureaucrats, politicians.
2. Under governments land distribution schemes- the landless were provided with Pattas (land
ownership document) but landmafias / 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 fight such legal battles. State government didnt
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 1980s, 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 Par
Hoga (All land issues will be
settled on the land itself).
Staging dharnas (sit-ins), hunger strikes on the disputed
land.
All the concerned officials, including from police to Patwari,
Tehsildar to magistrate should come the disputed land and
settle the matter.
Zamin Do Ya Jail Do (give us
land or imprisonment).
Peasants would court arrest and go to jail in a peaceful
manner.
1993: thousands of villages courted arrest
Finally government officials refused to arrest people as there
was no room left in Jails.
Chakka-Jam Blocking traffic on the mains roads.
Jaun Khet man nagar
Chalahi, wohi khet ke malik
ho (land to the tiller)
directly plough the fields with or without government
intervention.
At almost all the places, the poor, landless, and small
farmers went in large numbers with their ploughs and
bullocks, to register their claim over the ancestral land.
At some places people were able to register their control
over the land, whereas in other places the official, 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.
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 mafia, 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 peoples 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 afforestation 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 weve seen:
80s
Ekta Parishad had been working for Land reforms in MP since the 80s.=>State
government setup committee just for eyewash.
2007 They organized Jansandesh. Government agreed but implementation was poor.
2008-
10
they consulted with many other NGOs/organizations to form a broader alliance for
land rights.
trained community leaders and activists from the weaker sections to run the next
peaceful movement
2011
started Jan Satyagraha Samvad Yatra over 24 states to hold public meetings and
dialogues with people.
2012
Ekta Parishad founder P.V. Rajagopal started Jan Satyagraha Yatra (foot march)
from Gwalior on 1
st
October 2012.
Their plan was to reach Delhi with 1 lakh people by 28
th
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 verification 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 effectively.
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
Single Women
HIV Affected People
Siddhis (Gujarat & Karnatka)
Fisherfolks
Slum inhabitants
Hawkers
Leprosy affected people
Physically /Mentally Challenged People
Tea Tribes
Salt/Mine/Bidi Workers
Pastoral communities
Bonded Labourers
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 notified in writing.
3. For any changes in land records, Gram Sabha must be notified 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 conflict 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 dont 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 policy
Land reform is state subject but we will come up with a national land reform
policy- with inputs from state governments, civil society and public.
laws
like MNREGA and Forest rights act, well come up with new laws for
1. giving land to poors in backward districts
2. guarantee 10 cents of homestead to every landless poor household in
entire India.
rights
well advice state governments to implement their existing laws to protect the land
rights of SC/ST.
Tribunals
well work with States to run Fast Track Land Tribunals/Courts for speedy
disposal of land dispute related cases particularly involving SC/ST.
PESA
Rural ministry with work with Tribal ministry and Panchayati raj ministry + state
governments for implementation of PESA 1996. (but then why were you sleeping
all these years?)
FRA
Tribal ministry has issued revised rules for Forest rights Act 2006. Well ask
States to implement them quickly.
Survey
well ask states to setup joint teams of forest+Revenue officials to do the survey
of the forest and revenue boundaries to resolve disputes
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 significant movements initiated by people for land reforms in India after
independence.
7. critically evaluate non-governmental initiatives in the area of land reform
8. Explain the four significant outcomes of the great land struggle
9. Write a note on the demands and outcomes of Jan Satyagraha 2012.
Consolidation of Land Holdings, Cooperative Farming, Computerization of Land records:
features, benefits, limitations
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: Benefits, Advantages, Positive points
5. (-ve) Land consolidation: Difficulties, Obstacles, Negative points
3. Topic#2: Cooperative Farming
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
4. Topic#3: Computerization of Land Records
1. National Land Records Modernization Programme (NLRMP)
2. Funding pattern of NLRMP
3. Benefits/Potential of NLRMP
5. Mock Question
Prologue
so far in the [Land reform] series, weve seen following:
1. British Land tenure System
2. Peasant Struggles for Land reforms during British Raj
3. Role of Indian Congress in Land reforms during the British Raj
4. Land Reform Tool#1: Abolition of Zamindari, Reasons, Impact, Obstacles, Limitations, First
Amendment
5. Land Reform Tool#2: Ceiling on landholdings
6. Land Reform Tool#3: Tenancy Reform reform acts
7. Bhoodan, Gramdan, Jan Satyagraha 2012 & other movements for landreforms
In this article, we see three topics related to [Land reforms]
1. Cooperative farming
2. Consolidation of land holdings
3. Computerization of Land records.
In the next article, well see forest rights act, draft national policy and few other misc topics. Thatll be
(most likely) the last article under [Land reform] series.
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 first 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
societies.
does not lead to any dispute
no pressure/coercion exerted on
anybody.
very slow.
Zamindars usually create hurdles in its progress.
Sometimes a few obstinate (Stubborn) farmers
oppose the scheme.
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
If a majority of farmers in a village agree to get
their holdings consolidated, then the rest of the
farmers too will have to get their fragmented
holdings consolidated.
1923: MP passed first act.
1936: Punjab passed act. according to this
act: IF 66% of the farmers owning 75% of the
village land, agreed for land consolidation, then
remaining farmers will have to compulsory
agree.
In this case, state government
make law to compulsory land
consolidation (irrespective of how
many farmers actually want it)
1947: Bombay state (now
Maharashtra) was the first state to
enact compulsory
1948: Punjab also passed similar
act.
Now many states have passed
laws to this effect.
(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: Benefits, Advantages, Positive points
1. Scientific methods of cultivation, better irrigation, mechanization = possible on consolidated
holdings = reduces cost of production + increases income.
2. Saves farmers 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 groundsand desi liquor dens for the benefit of entire village.
(-ve) Land consolidation: Difficulties, 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 Ill 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 difficult because of lack of land surveys, agri.surveys and
inefficient/corrupt revenue officials.
6. Revenue official @village / Tehsil level are inefficient and not trained in this type of technical
work.
7. Recall Ashok Khemka (the IAS officer 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 mafias/dalal type elements would first 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 profit with minimum effort. Thus original purpose of land
consolidation (to increase agro. productivity) is defeated.
Anyways, enough of land consolidation, lets move to the second topic:
Topic#2: Cooperative Farming
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. Profit 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 benefits/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
theyre combined into a big cooperative farm, we can also cultivate on that boundary
land.
c. overall, Large farms are economically more beneficial 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
before independence
Gandhi, Nehru, Socialists and Communists agreed that
cooperative farming will improve Indian agriculture and benefit the
poor.
Bombay Plan44
Cooperative farming is the only way to combat sub-marginal
cultivation.
Government should compel small/marginal farmers to undertake
cooperative farming.
Cooperative Planning
Committee45
1. large scale cultivation is the only solution to increase agro-
production permanently.
2. Suggested four types of cooperative farming societies viz.
a. better farming
b. tenant farming
c. joint farming
d. Collective farming society.
Economic Program
committee47
headed by Nehru. Recommended that:
1. All middlemen should be replaced by non-profit making agencies,
such as cooperatives.
2. Pilot schemes for cooperative farming among small land holders in
India.
3. Well promote cooperative farming through persuasion, goodwill
and agreement of the peasantry.
4. Well not use any legal or administrative force/compulsion/coercion
to make small farmers start cooperative farming.
Congress Agrarian
headed by Kumarappa recommended that:
Reforms Committee49
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 farming.
Give state aid/ subsidies to cooperative farms.
Specially trained cadre/officials to train and motivate farmers in
cooperative farming.
So, this is the first 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 profit, 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?
1. C.
Rajagopalachari
2. N.G. Ranga
3. Charan Singh
Cooperative farming would lead to forced collectivization on the
Soviet or Chinese pattern.
Nehru is imposing a totalitarian, Communist programme upon
the country.
Nehru (clarifies in
Parliament)
were not going to make any law/act to coerce anyone to start
cooperative farming.
Later Chinese attack on Tibet and India. Critiques start pointing out how Nehrus 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 reaffirming the governments 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 commissions 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$H under the heading Cooperation, but it was only meant for inter-farm
co-operative service facilities e.g. seed-fertilizer-water supply, use of tractors/agro-
machineries etc.
After this era, five year plans give more attention (and ca$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 didnt change.
During 2
nd
FYP, the National Development Council proposed that in the next five 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
Theyd 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 fulfil 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 efforts 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 officially the land still continues to be in the
name of the societies.
Free riders
Some member-farmers become lazy, thinking why bother when well get the same amount of
profit 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 affiliations entering in cooperative farming
activities, with their own vested interests.
Ultimately, nobody takes interest in the actual farming and entire project turns flop.
Overall, Cooperative farming didnt grow beyond the government projects and the bogus
cooperatives.
anyways, enough of cooperative farming, lets move to the third and last topic of this article:
Topic#3: Computerization of Land Records
Under the British Raj, Land Revenue =significant 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 = doesnt
get much budgetary allocation.
As a result, revenue department wont hire many officers/employees, wont bother building
new offices, 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 office with revenue offices. 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 12
th
Five year plan.
Funding pattern of NLRMP
Just for information:
work
% funding by:
center state
1. computerize land records
100 0
2. survey
90
10% north eastern
states
50 50% other states
3. computerize registration process, link sub-registrars office
with revenue offices
90
10% north eastern
states
25 75% other states
4. modern record rooms in Tehsil offices
90
10% north eastern
states
50 50% other states
5. training, capacity building
100 0
6. Core GIS
100 0
Benefits/Potential of NLRMP
1. Provides security of property rights with conclusive titles and title guarantee.
2. Minimizes land disputes.
3. Efficient functioning of the economic operations based on land, and overall efficiency 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 certificates such as caste certificates, income
certificates, domicile certificates; 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 file to Delhi and get the ca$h.
10. provides location specific 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. Define Cooperative farming. Why has it not met with grand success in India?
3. Cooperative farming has not taken firm 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.
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: Benefits, Advantages, Positive points
5. (-ve) Land consolidation: Difficulties, Obstacles, Negative points
3. Topic#2: Cooperative Farming
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
4. Topic#3: Computerization of Land Records
1. National Land Records Modernization Programme (NLRMP)
2. Funding pattern of NLRMP
3. Benefits/Potential of NLRMP
5. Mock Question
Prologue
so far in the [Land reform] series, weve seen following:
1. British Land tenure System
2. Peasant Struggles for Land reforms during British Raj
3. Role of Indian Congress in Land reforms during the British Raj
4. Land Reform Tool#1: Abolition of Zamindari, Reasons, Impact, Obstacles, Limitations, First
Amendment
5. Land Reform Tool#2: Ceiling on landholdings
6. Land Reform Tool#3: Tenancy Reform reform acts
7. Bhoodan, Gramdan, Jan Satyagraha 2012 & other movements for landreforms
In this article, we see three topics related to [Land reforms]
1. Cooperative farming
2. Consolidation of land holdings
3. Computerization of Land records.
In the next article, well see forest rights act, draft national policy and few other misc topics. Thatll be
(most likely) the last article under [Land reform] series.
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 first 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
societies.
does not lead to any dispute
no pressure/coercion exerted on
anybody.
very slow.
Zamindars usually create hurdles in its progress.
Sometimes a few obstinate (Stubborn) farmers
oppose the scheme.
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
If a majority of farmers in a village agree to get
their holdings consolidated, then the rest of the
farmers too will have to get their fragmented
holdings consolidated.
1923: MP passed first act.
1936: Punjab passed act. according to this
act: IF 66% of the farmers owning 75% of the
village land, agreed for land consolidation, then
remaining farmers will have to compulsory
agree.
In this case, state government
make law to compulsory land
consolidation (irrespective of how
many farmers actually want it)
1947: Bombay state (now
Maharashtra) was the first state to
enact compulsory
1948: Punjab also passed similar
act.
Now many states have passed
laws to this effect.
(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: Benefits, Advantages, Positive points
1. Scientific methods of cultivation, better irrigation, mechanization = possible on consolidated
holdings = reduces cost of production + increases income.
2. Saves farmers 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 groundsand desi liquor dens for the benefit of entire village.
(-ve) Land consolidation: Difficulties, 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 Ill 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 difficult because of lack of land surveys, agri.surveys and
inefficient/corrupt revenue officials.
6. Revenue official @village / Tehsil level are inefficient and not trained in this type of technical
work.
7. Recall Ashok Khemka (the IAS officer 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 mafias/dalal type elements would first 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 profit with minimum effort. Thus original purpose of land
consolidation (to increase agro. productivity) is defeated.
Anyways, enough of land consolidation, lets move to the second topic:
Topic#2: Cooperative Farming
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. Profit 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 benefits/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
theyre combined into a big cooperative farm, we can also cultivate on that boundary
land.
c. overall, Large farms are economically more beneficial 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
before independence
Gandhi, Nehru, Socialists and Communists agreed that
cooperative farming will improve Indian agriculture and benefit the
poor.
Bombay Plan44
Cooperative farming is the only way to combat sub-marginal
cultivation.
Government should compel small/marginal farmers to undertake
cooperative farming.
Cooperative Planning
Committee45
1. large scale cultivation is the only solution to increase agro-
production permanently.
2. Suggested four types of cooperative farming societies viz.
a. better farming
b. tenant farming
c. joint farming
d. Collective farming society.
Economic Program
committee47
headed by Nehru. Recommended that:
1. All middlemen should be replaced by non-profit making agencies,
such as cooperatives.
2. Pilot schemes for cooperative farming among small land holders in
India.
3. Well promote cooperative farming through persuasion, goodwill
and agreement of the peasantry.
4. Well not use any legal or administrative force/compulsion/coercion
to make small farmers start cooperative farming.
Congress Agrarian
headed by Kumarappa recommended that:
Reforms Committee49
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 farming.
Give state aid/ subsidies to cooperative farms.
Specially trained cadre/officials to train and motivate farmers in
cooperative farming.
So, this is the first 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 profit, 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?
1. C.
Rajagopalachari
2. N.G. Ranga
3. Charan Singh
Cooperative farming would lead to forced collectivization on the
Soviet or Chinese pattern.
Nehru is imposing a totalitarian, Communist programme upon
the country.
Nehru (clarifies in
Parliament)
were not going to make any law/act to coerce anyone to start
cooperative farming.
Later Chinese attack on Tibet and India. Critiques start pointing out how Nehrus 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 reaffirming the governments 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 commissions 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, five 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 didnt change.
During 2
nd
FYP, the National Development Council proposed that in the next five 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
Theyd 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 fulfil 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 efforts 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 officially the land still continues to be in the
name of the societies.
Free riders
Some member-farmers become lazy, thinking why bother when well get the same amount of
profit 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 affiliations entering in cooperative farming
activities, with their own vested interests.
Ultimately, nobody takes interest in the actual farming and entire project turns flop.
Overall, Cooperative farming didnt grow beyond the government projects and the bogus
cooperatives.
anyways, enough of cooperative farming, lets move to the third and last topic of this article:
Topic#3: Computerization of Land Records
Under the British Raj, Land Revenue =significant 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 = doesnt
get much budgetary allocation.
As a result, revenue department wont hire many officers/employees, wont bother building
new offices, 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 office with revenue offices. 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 12
th
Five year plan.
Funding pattern of NLRMP
Just for information:
work
% funding by:
center state
1. computerize land records
100 0
2. survey
90
10% north eastern
states
50 50% other states
3. computerize registration process, link sub-registrars office
with revenue offices
90
10% north eastern
states
25 75% other states
4. modern record rooms in Tehsil offices
90
10% north eastern
states
50 50% other states
5. training, capacity building
100 0
6. Core GIS
100 0
Benefits/Potential of NLRMP
1. Provides security of property rights with conclusive titles and title guarantee.
2. Minimizes land disputes.
3. Efficient functioning of the economic operations based on land, and overall efficiency 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 certificates such as caste certificates, income
certificates, domicile certificates; 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 file to Delhi and get the ca$h.
10. provides location specific 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. Define Cooperative farming. Why has it not met with grand success in India?
3. Cooperative farming has not taken firm 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.