UPSC Prelims 2024 Q57: Permanent Settlement vs Ryotwari — Explained
With reference to revenue collection by Cornwallis, consider the following statements:
1. Under the Ryotwari Settlement of revenue collection, the peasants were exempted from revenue payment in case of bad harvests or natural calamities.
2. Under the Permanent Settlement in Bengal, if the Zamindar failed to pay his revenues to the state, on or before the fixed date, he would be removed from his Zamindari.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- 1 only
- 2 only
- Both 1 and 2
- Neither 1 nor 2
UPSC dropped this question from evaluation.
Statement-wise explanation
- 1: incorrect — Thomas Munro and Alexander Read designed the Ryotwari Settlement. Munro introduced it in Madras when he was Governor (1820–27), long after Cornwallis left India in 1793. Under Ryotwari the ryot paid revenue straight to the state, and there was no general rule excusing payment in a bad season. Remissions were discretionary and patchy. NCERT's account of the Bombay Deccan shows peasants still owing high revenue when the rains failed, which pushed them into debt.
- 2: correct — The Permanent Settlement of 1793 fixed each zamindar's revenue for all time, whatever the harvest. Under the Sunset Law, if the money had not arrived by sunset on the due date, the zamindari could be auctioned. So a zamindar who defaulted lost his estate to the auction buyer.
How to eliminate
UPSC dropped this question, and the stem is the likely reason. It says 'revenue collection by Cornwallis', but only the Permanent Settlement (1793) belongs to Cornwallis. Ryotwari was Munro's system, introduced in Madras in 1820–27. Statement 1 therefore sits on a false premise. Statement 1 was also open to dispute on its own terms, because remissions did exist in some Ryotwari practice, though only at the officials' discretion. If the premise is ignored, the absolute claim in Statement 1 ('exempted' in bad harvests) is the weak point: colonial land settlements were known for rigid demands. Statement 2 is the textbook Sunset Law. Facts to remember: Cornwallis brought the Permanent Settlement to Bengal in 1793. Munro and Read brought Ryotwari to Madras. Holt Mackenzie (1822) and later Bird and Thomason brought Mahalwari to the North-Western Provinces.
Know more
Three British land revenue settlements
The East India Company needed steady revenue from land. Each region got a different answer to one question: who pays the state, and how much?
| Feature | Permanent Settlement (Zamindari) | Ryotwari | Mahalwari |
|---|---|---|---|
| Year / architect | 1793, Lord Cornwallis | 1820 onward, Thomas Munro & Alexander Read | 1822, Holt Mackenzie; revised 1833 (Bird, Thomason) |
| Region | Bengal, Bihar, Odisha, Benares | Madras, Bombay, Assam | North-Western Provinces, Punjab, parts of Central India |
| Who pays the state | Zamindar | Ryot (cultivator) directly | Village or estate (mahal) as a body |
| Revenue fixed? | Fixed for ever | Revised periodically (about 20–30 years) | Revised periodically |
| Ownership | Zamindar treated as owner | Ryot treated as proprietor | Village community / co-sharers |
The Sunset Law. Under the Permanent Settlement, revenue had to reach the treasury by sunset on the fixed date. If it did not, the estate was auctioned. In the early decades, many old zamindari houses lost land this way. Rich peasants (jotedars) and urban buyers often took over through benami purchases.
Why Ryotwari was harsh too. Removing the middleman did not make the burden lighter. Assessments were high and demanded in cash. They did not change with the harvest. When the crops failed, ryots borrowed from moneylenders. Debt in the Bombay Deccan led to the 1875 Deccan Riots.
Exam tip. UPSC often pairs a settlement with the wrong person, region or year. Learn the table above as fixed links: Cornwallis–Bengal–1793; Munro–Madras–1820; Mackenzie–NWP–1822.
NCERT Concepts to Revise
- Permanent Settlement: Statement 2 tests a rule of the 1793 settlement that Cornwallis introduced in Bengal.
- Sunset law: Statement 2 describes what happened to a zamindar who missed the revenue deadline.
- Ryotwari system: Statement 1 depends on how Ryotwari treated revenue owed by individual cultivators in bad seasons.
- Thomas Munro: Knowing who designed Ryotwari, and when, explains the problem with the question's stem.
- Zamindari system: Shows the zamindar's role as the go-between who paid the state a fixed sum.
- Land revenue settlement: The general framework for comparing who paid, how much, and by when across settlements.