Assignment

On
Permanent Settlement Act 1793: Impacts on the society

Submitted to: Brig. Gen. Shafaat Ahmad, PhD, ndc, psc (Retd)

Course name: GED- 1105, BangladeshStudies

Submitted by

Name: Md. Nafis Al Zamee

Roll- 2225171110

Department- BBA in Marketing

Submission Date: 15/09/2022

1 | Page
 Objectives

The assignment discusses what the permanent settlement act is, how it was
introduced by Lord Cornwalis in 1793, reasons why it failed and it’s impact on
the society.

Introduction

The permamanent Settlement act was a grand contract signed in 1793

between the government of the East India Company in Bengal and individual
landholders of Bengal zaminders and Talukders. Under the contract, the
zamindars were admitted into the colonial state system as the absolute
proprietors of landed property in Bengal. It was concluded by Lord Cornwallis.
This legislation was called Cornwallis Code. As a whole this system made
Zamindrers owners of the land, peasants were left at their mercy.

2 | Page
 Past History of Permanent Settlement Act

Different European nations (Portuguese-1498, Dutch-1602, English-1608, Denmark-1616,

French-1668) have come to trade in the Indian subcontinent at different times. Only the
British established colonial rule in India by setting up trading factories. The British rule in
Bengal was not established in a day. From the Mughal period, the British laid the foundation
of the rule of East India Company in various ways. In 1757, Lord Clive defeated Nawab
Sirajuddaula in the battle of Palashi and handed over the power of Bengal directly to the
Company. Lord Clive took over civil power by introducing dual rule. But the results of dual
rule are failed and occured famine in Bengal in 1769-70 and collapsed of law-order and
economy.

WHY THE LAND REFORMS WERE HAPPENING

1. The company realized that they are ignorant in the matter of language, culture and
local traditions. So they are not getting enough revenue.
2. The logistics and administrative cost will be higher if they hire someone to do that.

Features of the Permanent Settlement

● Landlords or Zamindars were recognised as the owners of the land. They were given
hereditary rights of succession of the lands under them.
● The Zamindars could sell or transfer the land as they wished.
● The Zamindars’ proprietorship would stay as long as he paid the fixed revenue at the
said date to the government. If they failed to pay, their rights would cease to exist
and the land would be auctioned off.
● The amount to be paid by the landlords was fixed. It was agreed that this would not
increase in future (permanent).
● The fixed amount was 10/11th portion of the revenue for the government and
1/10th was for the Zamindar. This tax rate was way higher than the prevailing rates
in England.
● The Zamindar also had to give the tenant a patta which described the area of the
land given to him and the rent he had to pay the landlord.

3 | Page
Merits of Permanent Settlement Act

● The responsibility of taking care of farmers fell upon the shoulders of the Indian
landlords.
● Being sons of the soil, they could reach the far corners of the region and also
understand local customs very well.
● Because of the permanent nature of the system, there was a sense of security for
everyone. The company knew the amount it would get in revenue. The landlord also
was assured of the amount. Finally, the farmers also, in lieu of the patta were certain
of their holdings and knew how much rent was to be paid.
● Since the settlement was of a permanent nature, the Zamindars would have an
interest in the improvement in the land thereby improving the revenue.

Demerits of Permanent Settlement Act

(1) The immediate effect of the permanent settlement on the zamindars was disastrous.
Many of them could not realize the land revenue from their tenants and consequently could
not pay the money to the Government in time. The result was that their lands were sold.
(2) Contrary to the expectations, the landlords did not take much interest in the
development of their lands. They became merely absentee landlords living in Calcutta or at
the district towns on the income derived from the tenants. It has rightly been pointed out
that although Cornwallis intended to create a class of English landlords in Bengal, what he
actually created was a class of Irish landlords.
(3) The permanent settlement ignored the rights of the tenants. They were left absolutely at
the mercy of the landlords who could oust them at any time. The landlords could charge any
amount of money from the tenants he pleased. It is true that Cornwallis had lain down that
“the zamindar should keep a register of his tenants and grant them Pattahs or leases,
specifying the rents they were to pay, and that in case of any infringement of these rules,
the rot was to seek a remedy in an action against him in the civil court,” but unfortunately
the registers were not kept and the Pattahs were rarely given. The remedy of the civil court
was a very expensive one and the poor tenants felt that they could not take advantage of it.
This state of affairs continued till the Government came to the rescue of the tenants and
safeguarded their interests by passing tenancy legislation.
(4) The Government lost forever a share of the unearned increment. The deficit was
estimated at Rs. 4.5 crore.

4 | Page
(5) Bengal did not possess cadastral records till 1893 and consequently there was expensive
litigation between the tenants and the landlords.
SETTON CARR sums up his criticism thus :  “The permanent settlement somewhat securd the
interests of the zamindars, postponed those of the tenants and permanently sacrificed
those of the State,”
According to P.E. Roberts, “Had the permanent settlement been postponed for another 10
to 20 years, the capacities of the land would have been better ascertained. Many mistakes
and anomalies would have been avoided, and the reforms brought about by Cornwallis
himself in the civil service would have trained up a class of officials far more competent to
deal with so vast subject.”

Impact on Company/State
● By this settlement, the company was sure of getting fixed revenues.
● It also facilitated the easier method of collection of revenue through Zamindars.
● Before this settlement, the company needed large establishment / officials to make
annual / five yearly assessments.
● However, the permanent settlement could not enhance the amount of land revenue
because it was inherent in the settlement that it was permanent in terms of revenue
also and company could not increase a single pie even if there was rise in the
produce or prices of the produce.
● This was one of the reason that some British authors called the settlement a blunder
as it resulted in loss of enhanced land revenue in times to come.

Impact on Peasants and Productivity

5 | Page
 ● Since the permanent settlement made Zamindars owners of land, peasants were left
at their mercy.
● The Peasants had no right over land and could be kicked out any time.
● Zamindars got arbitrary powers to eject the cultivator and forfeit the agriculture
stock for non-payment.
● This was probably the lowest point in Indian Peasantry.
● Since any increase land productivity was not subject to increase taxes, it was
expected that Zamindars would make efforts to improve the conditions of the
tenants.
● Thus, it was clear that if the productivity of land is improved, company will have no
right to demand anything in excess of what was already settled.
● But this belief of Cornwallis was belied later because unfortunately, the increased
earnings were not spent on peasants.
● Instead this led to increased luxuries and pleasures of the Zamindars.
● The social outcome of permanent settlement in Bengal was that the society was
divided into two mutually hostile classes of Zamindars and Tenants.
● While Zamindars were favourite children of British Imperialism, they were few in
numbers in comparison to the other class of tenants. British won loyalty of a few at
cost of many.

The Permanent Settlement of Cornwallis was bitterly criticised on the point that it was
adopted with ‘undue haste’. The flagrant defect of this arrangement was that no attempt
was made ever either to survey the lands or to assess their value. In the end, it did helped
some zamindars, severely affected the farmers and the finances of State took a hit due to
the permanent nature of the revenue.

Conclusion
Although the Permanent Settlement Act was introduced in the land revenue reform of
Bengal, it had more detrimental aspects. Since it was modeled on the social system of
England, its implementation in Bengal failed.

6 | Page
References
Priyadarshini, S. Provisions of the Permanent Settlement Act of 1793. History Discussion.
Permanent Settlement, The. (n.d.). In Banglapedia.
Permanent Settlement. (n.d.). In Wikipedia.
Permanent Settlement - What is the purpose? Implementation and results. In Pipilika.
Quinquennial Settlement. (n.d.). In Banglapedia. ¬ Reasons for the failure of Permanent
Settlement. (2015, March 03). Career Ride.
Sarkar, B. H. History 1st Paper (History of Bangladesh and South Asia: 1857-1910). (4th
ed). Hasan Book House.
Warren Hastings. (n.d.). In Wikipedia.

7 | Page
Priyadarshini, S. Provisions of
the Permanent Settlement Act
of 1793. History Discussion.

8 | Page