The correct answer is Option 3 - A, B and C only
A. Taluqdars were not having any permanent stakes in land
B. British wanted to remove Taluqdars whenever possible
C. British wanted to settle the land with actual landowners
D. Revenue was fixed by the Britisher
E. The Summary Settlement later helped Taluqdars
The annexation of Awadh displaced not just the Nawab. It also dispossessed the taluqdars of the region. The countryside of Awadh was dotted with the estates and forts of taluqdars who for many generations had controlled land and power in the countryside. Before the coming of the British, taluqdars maintained armed retainers, built forts, and enjoyed a degree of autonomy, as long as they accepted the suzerainty of the Nawab and paid the revenue of their taluqs. Some of the bigger taluqdars had as many as 12,000 footsoldiers and even the smaller ones had about 200. The British were unwilling to tolerate the power of the taluqdars. Immediately after the annexation, the taluqdars were disarmed and their forts destroyed. The British land revenue policy further undermined the position and authority of the taluqdars. After annexation, the first British revenue settlement, known as the Summary Settlement of 1856, was based on the assumption that the (STATEMENT A) taluqdars were interlopers with no permanent stakes in land : they had established their hold over land through force and fraud. The Summary Settlement proceeded to remove the taluqdars wherever possible (STATEMENT B). Figures show that in pre-British times, taluqdars had held 67 per cent of the total number of villages in Awadh; by the Summary Settlement this number had come down to 38 per cent. The taluqdars of southern Awadh were the hardest hit and some lost more than half of the total number of villages they had previously held. British land revenue officers believed that by removing taluqdars they would be able to settle the land with the actual owners of the soil (STATEMENT C) and thus reduce the level of exploitation of peasants while increasing revenue returns for the state. But this did not happen in practice: revenue flows for the state increased but the burden of demand on the peasants did not decline. Officials soon found that large areas of Awadh were actually heavily overassessed: the increase of revenue demand in some places was from 30 to 70 per cent. Thus neither taluqdars nor peasants had any reasons to be happy with the annexation.
|
