Arrange the following in a hierarchical order in context of British India Company Rule.
A. Ryots
B. Jotedars
C. The Permanent Settlement
D. Zamindar
Choose the correct answer from the options given below:
Answer & explanation
Correct answer: option 3
The correct answer is Option (3) → C, D, B, A
C. The Permanent Settlement — the arrangement at the top: under it the East India Company fixed the revenue that each zamindar had to pay, and the estates of those who failed to pay were auctioned.
D. Zamindar — the zamindar held the estate and paid the revenue to the Company; he collected rent from the ryots of many villages.
B. Jotedars — the jotedars were rich peasants who lived in the villages and controlled large areas of land, local trade and moneylending.
A. Ryots — the ryots were the cultivators, who paid rent to the zamindar.
Note 1: The question is not properly framed. The Permanent Settlement is a revenue arrangement, not a rank in rural society, and the book says that within the villages the power of the jotedars was more effective than that of the zamindars. Going by the revenue system the Permanent Settlement set up – the Company above the zamindar, who was above the village – Option (3) is the most appropriate answer.
Note 2: It seems that there is a mistake in the original NTA paper, which prints Option (4) as ‘A, C, B, A’, with item A twice. Such an order is not possible, so the answer is not affected.
NCERT (2026-27): “1.1 An auction in Burdwan … The Permanent Settlement had come into operation in 1793. The East India Company had fixed the revenue that each zamindar had to pay. The estates of those who failed to pay were to be auctioned to recover the revenue.… 1.2 The problem of unpaid revenue … Zamindars had several (sometimes as many as 400) villages under them. In Company calculations the villages within one zamindari formed one revenue estate. The Company fixed the total demand over the entire estate whose revenue the zamindar contracted to pay. The zamindar collected rent from the different villages, paid the revenue to the Company, and retained the difference as his income. He was expected to pay the Company regularly, failing which his estate could be auctioned.… 1.4 The rise of the jotedars … By the early nineteenth century, jotedars had acquired vast areas of land – sometimes as much as several thousand acres. They controlled local trade as well as moneylending, exercising immense power over the poorer cultivators of the region. A large part of their land was cultivated through sharecroppers (adhiyars or bargadars) who brought their own ploughs, laboured in the field, and handed over half the produce to the jotedars after the harvest. Within the villages, the power of jotedars was more effective than that of zamindars. Unlike zamindars who often lived in urban areas, jotedars were located in the villages and exercised direct control over a considerable section of poor villagers.…” |