BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY

OF PROFESSIONALS
Assignment on
THE IMPACT OF PERMANENT SETTLEMENT
Course Title: BANGLADESH STUDIES
Course Code: CR-1304

Submitted to
BRIG.GEN SHAFAAT AHMAD

Submitted by
Name: Abdullah Bin Mahmudi
Id: 2225171077
Department of Marketing
Bangladesh university of Professionals
Date of submission: 30 August, 2022
 PERMANENT SETTLEMENT ACT
The Permanent Settlement of Bengal was basically an agreement between the British East
India Company and the Zamindars to fix the land revenue. It was brought into effect by the
company headed by the Governor-General Lord Cornwallis in 1793. First enacted in Bengal,
Bihar and Orissha, this was later followed in northern Madras Presidency and the district of
Varanasi. Cornwallis thought of this system inspired by the prevailing land revenue system in
England where the landlords were the permanent owners of their holdings and they collected
revenue from the peasants, paid a certain amount of revenue to the company and looked after
their interests. The right to ownership was made hereditary and transferrable. This system
was also called the Zamindari system.

Background:
Before the British advent in Bengal, there was a class of Zamindars in Bengal, Bihar
and Orissha who collected revenue from land on behalf of the Mughal Emperor or his
representative, the Diwan. After the Battle of Buxar in 1764, the East India Company
was granted the Diwani of Bengal. But then the Company struggled to collect revenue
from the innumerable number of farmers in rural areas. They also did not have a good
understanding of local laws and customs.

The system of annual settlement was in vogue. In 1772 Warren Hastings had
introduced Quin-Quennial settlement or Five year settlement according to which the
right of collection of revenue was given to the highest bidder for five years on
contract basis. But this settlement failed and Warren Hastings resorted to annual
settlement.

Due to the izaredari system, agricultural cultivation had started to show signs of
collapse in Bengal, Bihar and Orissha. The revenue generated from agriculture was
the main source of revenue for the British East India Company. But the company’s
revenue income was now on stake due to the implications in agriculture. They wanted
to maximise revenue from land. So they planned to invest on lands through zamindars
as the sole owners and in return shared a fixed revenue. This is how the permanent
settlement act came into place in 1793 by the Governor-General Lord Cornwallis of
British East India Company.

Provisions:

● According to the Permanent Land Settlement Act the Zamindars were recognised as
the permanent owners of the land.
● If zamindar does any fault, the land will be confiscated or sold to someone else
forcibly
● A fixed amount of revenue will be given to the company.
● The revenue has to be given by a particular date set by the company. Failure to do so
will lead the zamindars to lose their land. This is known as sunset law.
● Zamindars were denied of the right of policing
● Zamindars were also not allowed to hold any court.

Merits of Settlement:
1. The Government became free from the problem of fixation of revenue every year. The
state secured a stable and fixed income from the people. In case the Zamindars did not
pay the revenue, the loss was settled by selling a portion of the land of the Zamindars.
2. The land production value was also certain to rise since a surplus amount after the
sharing of revenue would be invested in betterment of agriculture and the production.
3. Since the zamindars were made the owners of the land, a class of loyal landlords were
formed. They made sure that they are maximising the value of the production and
saving the farmers from oppression as well.
4. It avoided the evils of periodical settlement which at long intervals produced
harassment of cultivators, evasion, concealment of wealth, a tendency on the part of
the peasants to leave the land uncultivated etc.

A table representing the merits is shown below-

Demerits:
1. The basic demerit of this system was that the efficiency depended upon the nature of
the Zamindars. If they were good, the interests of the farmers and the land were
looked after very well. They would make improvements in the land which would be
beneficial to everyone concerned. But if the landlords were bad, they were negligent
of the plight of the farmers and the conditions of the land.
 2. If the zamindars fail to pay the revenue in due time, their lands will cease to exist or
be auctioned off. So there were always uncertainties.

3. The land assessment was not done properly and land revenue was fixed arbitrarily.
This meant that both productive and unproductive land was expected to furnish
revenue at the same rates. This created a burden on the farmers of unproductive land.
Also, in the case of productive land, it was a loss of revenue to the government.
4. Most of the time, zamindars kept a big share of the revenue and gave little to the
peasants which created an imbalance and it wasn’t possible to invest for the land
production ultimately.
5. Most of the landlords did not take any interest in the improvement of the land. The
landlords became indolent and led luxurious lives staying in the cities. Thus this
settlement created a class of absentee landlords
6. Zamindar’s share from cultivator’s production was not fixed, this led to degradation
of the position of the cultivator
7. Subsequent regulations of 1799 and 1812 gave the zamindars the right to seize
property of the tenants at their will.
8. Burden of high revenue settlement was shifted to peasants. They were left at the
mercy of zamindars.
9. Sometimes peasants had to lend money from money-lenders and pay taxes to
zamindars.

Conclusion:
Thus, the Permanent Settlement brought no advantage to anybody except the
landlords. It proved more harmful than useful.Besides, whatever advantaged it had,
those could be achieved by a settlement which covered a period of nearly fifteen to
twenty years. The Company also realised it and, therefore, did not introduce it in other
parts of India except in Northern Sarkars in the South and the district of Banaras in
the North. The permanent settlement system was completely abolished after India’s
independence.