Modern india

Land Revenue Systems in British India: Zamindari, Ryotwari and Mahalwari

FILED UNDER: INDIAN HISTORY NOTES

For UPSC, Land Revenue Systems in British India is always a hot topic for Prelims and Mains. And as per the new syllabus ‘land reforms in India’ is specifically mentioned for GS Mains, and the relevance just got multiplied. Now let’s have a quick look at the different methods of land revenue collection systems which existed in India.

Land Revenue Systems Before British Rule

Tax from the land was a major source of revenue for the kings and emperors from ancient times. But the ownership pattern of land had witnessed changes over centuries. During Kingship, land was divided into Jagirs, Jagirs were alloted to Jagirdars, these Jagirdars split the land they got and allocated to sub-ordinate Zamindars. Zamindars made peasants cultivate the land, in-return collected part of their revenue as tax.

Land Revenue Systems in British India :

Three major systems of land revenue collection existed in India. They were – Zaminidari, Ryotwari and Mahalwari.

Zamindari System

• Zamindari System was introduced by Cornwallis in 1793 through Permanent Settlement Act.
• It was introduced in provinces of Bengal, Bihar, Orissa and Varanasi.
• Also known as Permanent Settlement System.
• Zamindars were recognized as owner of the lands. Zamindars were given the rights to collect the rent from the peasants.
• The realized amount would be divided into 11 parts. 1/11 of the share belongs to Zamindars and 10/11 of the share belongs to East India Company.

Ryotwari System

• Ryotwari System was introduced by Thomas Munro in 1820.
• Major areas of introduction include Madras, Bombay, parts of Assam and Coorgh provinces of British India.
• In Ryotwari System the ownership rights were handed over to the peasants. British Government collected taxes directly from the peasants.
• The revenue rates of Ryotwari System were 50% where the lands were dry and 60% in irrigated land.

Mahalwari System

• Mahalwari system was introduced in 1833 during the period of William Bentick.
• It was introduced in Central Province, North-West Frontier, Agra, Punjab, Gangetic Valley, etc of British India.
• The Mahalwari system had many provisions of both the Zamindari System and Ryotwari System.
• In this system, the land was divided into Mahals. Each Mahal comprises one or more villages.
• Ownership rights were vested with the peasants.
• The villages committee was held responsible for collection of the taxes.

Land Reforms in India After Independence

Zamindari Abolition Act was passed by UP, Tamil Nadu, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, etc. Surplus lands were confiscated from zamindars. Later Land Ceilings Act was passed by different states, fixing an upper limit for private land holdings of a family. Land reforms in India is discussed in detail in the highlighted link.

Historical Background of Indian Constitution

FILED UNDER: INDIAN HISTORY NOTES, INDIAN POLITY NOTES

Before 1947, India was divided into two main entities – The British India which consisted of 11 provinces and the Princely states ruled by Indian princes under subsidiary alliance policy. The two entities merged together to form the Indian Union, but many of the legacy systems in British India is followed even now. The historical underpinnings and evolution of the India Constitution can be traced to many regulations and acts passed before Indian Independence.

Indian System of Administration

Indian democracy is a Parliamentary form of democracy where the executive is responsible to the Parliament. The Parliament has two houses – Loksabha and Rajyasabha. Also, the type of governance is Federal, ie there is separate executive and legislature at Center and States. We also have self-governance at local government levels. All these systems owe their legacy to the British administration. Let us see the historical background of Indian Constitution and its development through years.

Regulating Act of 1773

• The first step was taken by the British Parliament to control and regulate the affairs of the East India Company in India.
• It designated the Governor of Bengal (Fort William) as the Governor-General (of Bengal).
• Warren Hastings became the first Governor-General of Bengal.
• Executive Council of the Governor-General was established (Four members). There was no separate legislative council.
• It subordinated the Governors of Bombay and Madras to the Governor-General of Bengal.
• The Supreme Court was established at Fort William (Calcutta) as the Apex Court in 1774.
• It prohibited servants of the company from engaging in any private trade or accepting bribes from the natives.
• Court of Directors ( the governing body of the company) should report its revenue.

Pitt’s India Act of 1784

• Distinguished between commercial and political functions of the company.
• Court of Directors for Commercial functions and Board of Control for political affairs.
• Reduced the strength of the Governor General’s council to three members.
• Placed the Indian affairs under the direct control of the British Government.
• The companies territories in India were called “the British possession in India”.
• Governor’s councils were established in Madras and Bombay.

Charter Act of 1813

• The Company’s monopoly over Indian trade terminated; Trade with India open to all British subjects.

Charter Act of 1833

• Governor-General (of Bengal) became as the Governor-General of India.
• First Governor-General of India was Lord William Bentick.
• This was the final step towards centralization in the British India.
• Beginning of a Central legislature for India as the act also took away legislative powers of Bombay and Madras provinces.
• The Act ended the activities of the East India Company as a commercial body and it became a purely administrative body.

Charter Act of 1853

• The legislative and executive functions of the Governor-General’s Council were separated.
• 6 members in Central legislative council. Four out of six members were appointed by the provisional governments of Madras, Bombay, Bengal and Agra.
• It introduced a system of open competition as the basis for the recruitment of civil servants of the Company (Indian Civil Service opened for all).

Government of India Act of 1858

• The rule of Company was replaced by the rule of the Crown in India.
• The powers of the British Crown were to be exercised by the Secretary of State for India
• He was assisted by the Council of India, having 15 members
• He was vested with complete authority and control over the Indian administration through the Viceroy as his agent
• The Governor-General was made the Viceroy of India.
• Lord Canning was the first Viceroy of India.
• Abolished Board of Control and Court of Directors.

Indian Councils Act of 1861

• It introduced for the first time Indian representation in the institutions like Viceroy’s executive+legislative council (non-official). 3 Indians entered Legislative council.
• Legislative councils were established in Center and provinces.
• It provided that the Viceroy’s Executive Council should have some Indians as the non-official members while transacting the legislative businesses.
• It accorded statutory recognition to the portfolio system.
• Initiated the process of decentralisation by restoring the legislative powers to the Bombay and the Madras Provinces.

India Council Act of 1892

• Introduced indirect elections (nomination).
• Enlarged the size of the legislative councils.
• Enlarged the functions of the Legislative Councils and gave them the power of discussing the Budget and addressing questions to the Executive.

Indian Councils Act of 1909

1. This Act is also known as the Morley- Minto Reforms.
2. Direct elections to legislative councils; first attempt at introducing a representative and popular element.
3. It changed the name of the Central Legislative Council to the Imperial Legislative Council.
4. The member of Central Legislative Council was increased to 60 from 16.
5. Introduced a system of communal representation for Muslims by accepting the concept of ‘separate electorate’.
6. Indians for the first time in Viceroys executive council. (Satyendra Prasad Sinha, as the law member)

Government of India Act of 1919

• This Act is also known as the Montague-Chelmsford Reforms.
• The Central subjects were demarcated and separated from those of the Provincial subjects.
• The scheme of dual governance, ‘Dyarchy’, was introduced in the Provincial subjects.
• Under dyarchy system, the provincial subjects were divided into two parts – transferred and reserved. On reserved subjects, Governor was not responsible to the Legislative council.
• The Act introduced, for the first time, bicameralism at center.
• Legislative Assembly with 140 members and Legislative councilwith 60 members.
• Direct elections.
• The Act also required that the three of the six members of the Viceroy’s Executive Council (other than Commander-in-Chief) were to be Indians.
• Provided for the establishment of Public Service Commission.

Government of India Act of 1935

• The Act provided for the establishment of an All-India Federation consisting of the Provinces and the Princely States as units, though the envisaged federation never came into being.
• Three Lists: The Act divided the powers between the Centre and the units into items of three lists, namely the Federal List, the Provincial List and the Concurrent List.
• The Federal List for the Centre consisted of 59 items, the Provincial List for the provinces consisted of 54 items and the Concurrent List for both consisted of 36 items
• The residuary powers were vested with the Governor-General.
• The Act abolished the Dyarchy in the Provinces and introduced ‘Provincial Autonomy’.
• It provided for the adoption of Dyarchy at the Centre.
• Introduced bicameralism in 6 out of 11 Provinces.
• These six Provinces were Assam, Bengal, Bombay, Bihar, Madras and the United Province.
• Provided for the establishment of Federal Court.
• Abolished the Council of India.

Indian Independence Act of 1947

• It declared India as an Independent and Sovereign State.
• Established responsible Governments at both the Centre and the Provinces.
• Designated the Viceroy India and the provincial Governors as the Constitutional (normal heads).
• It assigned dual functions (Constituent and Legislative) to the Constituent Assembly and declared this dominion legislature as a sovereign body.

Points to be noted

• Laws made before Charter Act of 1833 were called Regulations and those made after are called Acts.
• Lord Warren Hastings created the office of District Collector in 1772, but judicial powers were separated from District collector later by Cornwallis.
• From the powerful authorities of unchecked executives, the Indian administration developed into a responsible government answerable to the legislature and people.
• The development of portfolio system and budget points to the separation of power.
• Lord Mayo’s resolution on financial decentralization visualized the development of local self-government institutions in India (1870).
• 1882: Lord Ripon’s resolution was hailed as the ‘Magna Carta’ of local self-government. He is regarded as the ‘Father of local self-government in India’.
• 1921: Railway Budget was separated from the General Budget.
• From 1773 to 1858, the British tried for the centralization of power. It was from the 1861 Councils act they shifted towards devolution of power with provinces.
• 1833 Charter act was the most important act before the act of 1909.
• Till 1947, the Government of India functioned under the provisions of the 1919 Act only. The provisions of 1935 Act relating to Federation and Dyarchy were never implemented.
• The Executive Council provided by the 1919 Act continued to advise the Viceroy till 1947. The modern executive (Council of Ministers) owes its legacy to the executive council.
• The Legislative Council and Assembly developed into Rajyasabha and Loksabha after independence.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel – Biography, Facts, Life, and Contributions to Modern India

FILED UNDER: INDIAN HISTORY NOTES

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was a senior leader of Indian National Congress and a prominent figure in the Indian Freedom Struggle, who later became India’s first Deputy Prime Minister and first Home Minister. Sardar Patel’s contribution in integrating 565 princely states into a newly independent India is unforgettable.

In this post on Sardar Patel – who is popularly known as the Iron Man of India – we cover his life, vision, views, anecdotes, and important contributions to modern India.

Vallabhbhai Patel’s early life

Vallabhbhai Patel was born in Nadiad, Gujarat, on October 31, 1875 (His birth anniversary is now observed as National Unity Day or Rashtriya Ekta Diwas).

He hailed from a farmer's family. In his early years, Patel was considered by many as an unambitious man destined for a commonplace job. However, Patel proved them wrong. He passed law examination, often studying himself, with borrowed books.CLICK TO TWEET

Patel practised law at Godhra, Borsad, and Anand in Gujarat, after passing the bar examination. He earned the reputation of being a fierce and skilled lawyer.

Patel’s early willingness to sacrifice for others

Patel had a dream to study law in England. Using his hard-earned savings, he managed to get a pass and ticket to go to England.

However, the ticket was addressed to ‘V.J. Patel’. His elder brother Vithalbhai also had the same initials as Vallabhai. Sardar Patel came to know that his elder brother too cherished a dream to go to England for studies.

In keeping with concerns for his family’s honour (disreputable for an older brother to follow his younger brother), Vallabhbhai Patel allowed Vithalbhai Patel to go, in his place.

Patel’s Journey to England

In 1911, at the age of 36, two years after the death of his wife, Vallabhbhai Patel journeyed to England and enrolled at the Middle Temple Inn in London. Patel finished at the top of his class despite having had no previous college background. He completed the 36-month course in 30 months.

Returning to India, Patel settled in Ahmedabad and became one of the city’s most successful barristers.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s role in the Indian Freedom Movement

In the initial stages of the freedom movement, Patel was neither keen on active politics nor the principles of Mahatma Gandhi. However, the meeting with Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi in Godhra (1917) fundamentally changed Patel's life.CLICK TO TWEET

Patel joined the Congress and became the secretary of the Gujarat Sabha that became a Congress stronghold later.

On Gandhi’s call, Patel quit his hard-earned job and joined the movement to fight for exemption of taxes in Kheda at the time of plague and famine (1918).

Patel joined Gandhi’s Non-Cooperation Movement (1920) and travelled around West India to recruit 3,00,000 members. He also collected more than Rs 1.5 million for the party fund.

There was a British law banning the hoisting of the Indian Flag. When Mahatma Gandhi was imprisoned, it was Patel who led the Satyagraha movement in Nagpur in 1923 against the British law.

It was the Bardoli Satyagraha of 1928 which earned Vallabhbhai Patel the title of ‘Sardar’ and made him popular throughout the country. So great was the impact that Pandit Motilal Nehru suggested Vallabhbhai’s name to Gandhiji for the presidency of the Congress.CLICK TO TWEET

In 1930, British arrested Sardar Patel during the Salt Satyagraha and put him on trial without witnesses.

On the outbreak of World War II (1939), Patel the supported Nehru’s decision to withdraw the Congress from central and provincial legislatures.

Patel was at his persuasive best when he spoke at the Gwalia Tank ground (now called August Kranti Maidan) in Mumbai to launch the nation-wide civil disobedience movement in 1942 at the behest of Mahatma Gandhi.

During Quit India Movement (1942), the British arrested Patel. He was imprisoned with the entire Congress Working Committee from 1942 to 1945 at the fort in Ahmednagar.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel as Congress President

After the signing of the Gandhi–Irwin Pact, Patel was elected president of Congress for its 1931 session (Karachi).CLICK TO TWEET

Congress committed itself to the defence of fundamental rights and civil liberties. Patel advocated for the establishment of a secular nation. Minimum wages for workers and the abolition of untouchability were among his other priorities.

Patel used his position as Congress president to organise the return of confiscated land to farmers in Gujarat.

Sardar Patel – The Social Reformer

Patel worked extensively against alcohol consumption, untouchability, caste discrimination and for women emancipation in Gujarat and outside.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel – As Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister

After Independence, he became India’s first Deputy Prime Minister. On the first anniversary of Independence, Patel was appointed as the Home Minister of India. He was also in charge of the States Department and the Information and Broadcasting Ministry

As the first Home Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of India, Patel organised relief efforts for refugees fleeing from Punjab and Delhi and worked to restore peace.

In what was to become Sardar Patel’s most lasting legacy, he took charge of the States Department and was responsible for the accession of 565 princely states into the Union of India. Paying tribute to him, Nehru called Sardar ‘the builder and consolidator of new India.’

However, the invaluable services of Sardar Patel were available to independent India for just 3 years. The brave son of India died on 15 December 1950 (aged 75), after suffering a massive heart attack.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s role in the Integration of the princely states

Sardar Patel despite his failing health and age never lost sight of the larger purpose of creating United India. As India's first Home Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, Sardar Patel played a key role in the integration of about 565 princely states into the Indian Union.CLICK TO TWEET

Few princely states like Travancore, Hyderabad, Junagadh, Bhopal and Kashmir were averse to joining the state of India.

Sardar Patel worked tirelessly to build a consensus with the princely states but did not hesitate in employing methods of Sama, Dama, Dand and Bhed where ever necessary.

He had used force to annex princely states of Junagadh ruled by Nawab and Hyderabad ruled by Nizam, both of whom had wished not to merge their respective states with Union of India.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel stitched the princely states along with British Indian territory and prevented balkanization of India.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and All-India Services like IAS

Sardar Patel was of the opinion that we will not have a united India if we do not have a good all-India Service.

Patel was clearly conscious of the fact that independent India needed ‘a steel frame to run its civil, military, and administrative bureaucracy. His faith in institutional mechanisms like having an organized command based army and a systemized bureaucracy proved to be a blessing.’

His exhortation to the probationers to maintain utmost impartiality and incorruptibility of administration is as relevant today as it was then.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel as the first Prime Minister of India?

In the AICC Session of 15th January 1942 held at Wardha, Gandhiji formally designated Jawaharlal Nehru as his political successor. In Gandhiji’s own words '... not Rajaji, not Sardar Vallabhabhai, but Jawaharlal will be my successor...When I am gone, he will speak my language.'CLICK TO TWEET

Thus, it can be seen that it was none other than Gandhiji who wanted Nehru to lead India, apart from the masses. Patel always listened and obeyed Gandhi – who himself had no political ambitions in free India.

However, for the post of Congress Presidentship in 1946, Pradesh Congress Committees (PCCs) had a different choice – Patel. Even though Nehru had a great mass appeal, and a broader vision about the world, 12 out of 15 PCCs favoured Patel as Congress President. Patel’s qualities – as a great executive, organizer and leader – were widely appreciated.

When Nehru came to know about the PCCs choice, he remained silent. Mahatma Gandhi felt that “Jawaharlal will not take second place”, and he asked Patel to withdraw his nomination for Congress President. Patel, as always, obeyed Gandhi. Nehru took over as Congress President for a short period of time in 1946, before handing over the responsibility to J.B.Kriplani.

For Nehru, the Prime Ministership of Free India was just an extension of his role in the interim cabinet.

It was Jawaharlal Nehru who headed the interim government of India from 2nd September 1946 to 15th August 1947. Nehru was the Vice-President of the Viceroy’s Executive Council with powers of the Prime Minister. Vallabhbhai Patel held the second-most powerful position in the Council, heading the Department of Home Affairs and Department of Information and Broadcasting.

On August 1, 1947, two weeks before India became independent, Nehru wrote to Patel a letter asking him to join the cabinet. Nehru, however, indicated that he already consider Patel as the strongest pillar of the Cabinet. Patel replied guaranteeing unquestioned loyalty and devotion. He had also mentioned that their combination is unbreakable and therein lies their strength.

Nehru and Patel

Nehru and Patel was a rare combination. They complemented each other. The two great leaders of Indian National Congress had mutual admiration and respect. There were differences in approach - but end goal for both was to find what is best for India.CLICK TO TWEET

The differences of opinion were mostly regarding the Congress hierarchy, working style, or ideologies. Within Congress – Nehru was widely considered Left-wing (socialism) while Patel’s ideologies were aligned with the Right-wing (capitalism).

There were differences in the choice of Congress presidential candidates in 1950 between Nehru and Patel. Nehru supported J.B. Kriplani. Patel’s choice was Purushottam Das Tandon. In the end, Kriplani was defeated by Patel’s candidate Purushottam Das Tandon.

However, it should be noted that the differences were never big enough to result in a major split in the Congress or the Government.

Gandhi and Patel

Patel was always loyal to Gandhi. However, he differed with Gandhiji on certain issues.

Following Gandhiji’s assassination, he said: “I claim to be nothing more than an obedient soldier of him like the millions who obeyed his call. There was a time when everyone used to call me his blind follower. But, both he and I knew that I followed him because our convictions tallied”.

Patel and Somnath Temple

On November 13, 1947, Sardar Patel, the then deputy Prime Minister of India, vowed to rebuild Somnath Temple. Somnath had been destroyed and built several times in the past. He felt that the story of its resurrection from ruins this time would be symbolic of the story of the resurgence of India.

Sardar Patel’s Economic Ideas

Self-reliance was among the chief tenets of Patel's economic philosophy. He wanted to see India industrialise quickly. The imperative being to reduce dependence on external resources.CLICK TO TWEET

Patel guided the cooperative movements in Gujarat and helped in setting up of the Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers’ Union which proved to be a game changer for the dairy farming throughout the country.

Sardar was unimpressed with the slogans raised for socialism and spoke often of the need for India to create wealth before debating over what to do with it, how to share it.

The role he envisaged for the government was that of a welfare state but realised that other countries had taken up the task at more advanced stages of development.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel rejected nationalisation completely and was against controls. To him, the profit motive was a great stimulant to exertion, not a stigma.

Patel was against people remaining idle. In 1950 he said, “Millions of idle hands that have no work cannot find employment on machines”. He urged labourers to participate in creating wealth before claiming a just share.

Sardar championed investment-led growth. He said, “Spend less, save more, and invest as much as possible should be the motto of every citizen.

Was Patel against the partition of British India – into India and Pakistan?

Sardar in his early years opposed the partition of British India. However, he accepted the division of India by December 1946. Many including VP Menon and Abul Kalam Azad felt that Patel was more receptive to the idea of Partition than Nehru.CLICK TO TWEET

Abul Kalam Azad was a staunch critic of Partition right till the very end, however, that was not the case with Patel and Nehru. Azad in his memoir India wins Freedom says that he was ‘surprised and pained when Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel in reply to why Partition was needed said that ‘whether we liked it or not, there were two nations in India’.

Sardar Patel as a defender of Hindu interests

According to Raj Mohan Gandhi, one of Patel's most highly regarded biographer, Patel was the Hindu face of Indian nationalism. Nehru was the secular and global face of Indian nationalism. However, both worked under the same umbrella of Indian National Congress.CLICK TO TWEET

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was an open defender of Hindu interests. This however made Patel less popular among minorities.

However, Patel was never communal. As Home Minister, he did his best to protect Muslim lives in Delhi during riots. Patel had a Hindu heart (because of his upbringing) but he ruled with an impartial and secular hand.

Sardar Patel and RSS

Sardar Patel initially had a soft corner towards Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), and their efforts in the Hindu interest. However, after the assassination of Gandhi, Sardar Patel banned RSS.CLICK TO TWEET

“All their speeches were fill of communal poison“, he wrote after banning the Sangh in 1948. “As a final result of the poison, the country had to suffer the sacrifice of the invaluable life of Gandhiji.”

The ban on the RSS was eventually lifted on July 11, 1949, after Golwalkar agreed to make certain promises as conditions for the ban being revoked. In its communique announcing the lifting of the ban, the government of India said that the organisation and its leader had promised to be loyal to the constitution and the flag.

Statue of Unity, a tribute to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel?

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was an Indian National Congress leader – until his death. Many historians like Ramchandra Guha, thinks it is ironic that Patel is being claimed by the BJP when he “was himself a lifelong Congressman”.

Congress leader Shashi Tharoor allege that BJP was trying to 'hijack' the legacy of freedom fighters and national heroes like Patel as they have no leaders of their own in history to celebrate.CLICK TO TWEET

Many opposition leaders see vested interests in the ruling party’s effort to appropriate Patel and depict the Nehru family in bad light.

Built at a cost of Rs. 2,989 crore, the statue depicts Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, India’s first Home Minister, wearing a traditional dhoti and shawl, towering over the Narmada River.

At 182-metre, the statue is touted as the world’s tallest – it is 177 feet higher than China’s Spring Temple Buddha, currently the world’s tallest statue.

Iron was collected from all over the country for the statue of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, also known as the Iron Man of India.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s Quotes

“Work is worship but laughter is life. Anyone who takes life too seriously must prepare himself for a miserable existence. Anyone who greets joys and sorrows with equal facility can really get the best of life.”

“My culture is agriculture.”

“We worked hard to achieve our freedom; we shall have to strive harder to justify it”.

Conclusion

Patel was a selfless leader, who placed the country’s interests above everything else and shaped India’s destiny with single-minded devotion.

The invaluable contribution of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel in building a modern and unified India needs to be remembered by every Indian as the country marches ahead as one of the largest economies in the world.

Kashmir Issue – Understand the multiple dimensions

FILED UNDER: CURRENT AFFAIRS NOTES, INDIAN HISTORY NOTES

The Kashmir Issue is not just a border dispute between India and Pakistan. It has many dimensions – external and internal.

Was Kashmir an independent nation? Learn the history of Kashmir

Kashmir, and adjacent areas like Gilgit, Jammu, and Ladakh – were part of the different empires at different times. Over the years, this area was under the control of Hindu rulers, Muslim emperors, Sikhs, Afghans, and Britishers.

During the period before AD 1000, Kashmir was an important center of Buddhism and Hinduism. Many dynasties like Gonanditya, Karkota, Lohara ruled Kashmir and surrounding areas of North-western India.

The Hindu dynasty rule which extended until 1339 was replaced by the Muslim rule by Shah Mir who became the first Muslim ruler of Kashmir, inaugurating the Shah Mir dynasty. A few centuries later, the last independent ruler Yusuf Shah Chak was deposed by the Mugul emperor Akbar the Great.

Akbar conquered Kashmir in 1587, making it part of the Mughal Empire. Subsequently, the Mughal ruler Aurangzeb expanded the empire further.

Thus, it can be seen that under the Mughal rule, which extended nearly all of the Indian subcontinent, Kashmir was an integral part of India – however, not an independent nation.

Kashmir Region – After Mughals

Aurangzeb’s successors were weak rulers. Later Mughals failed to retain Kashmir. After Mughal rule, it passed to Afghan, Sikh, and Dogra rule.

In 1752, Kashmir was seized by the Afghan ruler Ahmed Shah Abdali. The Afghan Durrani Empire ruled Kasmir from the 1750s until 1819 when Sikhs, under Ranjit Singh, annexed Kashmir and ended the Muslim rule.

By the early 19th century, Sikhs under Maharaja Renjith Singh took control of Kashmir. He had earlier annexed Jammu. The Sikhs ruled Kashmir until they were defeated by the British (First Anglo-Sikh War) in 1846.

After that Kashmir became a princely state of the British Empire – under the Dogra Dynasty.

Jammu and Kashmir – as a princely state of the British Empire

Maharaja Gulab Singh of Dogra Dynastysigned the ‘Treaty of Amritsar’ with the British East India Company in 1846. Under this treaty, he paid Rs. 75 lakhs to the East India Company in 1846 in exchange for Kashmir and some other areas. Jammu and Kashmir as a single entity was unified and founded (1846).

Zorawar Singh, a General in the Dogra Anny later led many campaigns in the northern areas like Ladakh, Baltistan, Gilgit, Hunza and Yagistan, consolidating smaller principalities. He expanded the dominions of Maharaja Gulab Singh.

However, Jammu and Kashmir, from 1846 until 1947, remained a princely state ruled by Jamwal Rajput Dogra Dynasty. Like all other princely states in India then, Kashmir too enjoyed only a partial autonomy, as the real control was with the British.

The ruler’s stand (at the time of Partition)

During the time of partition of British India (1947), Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) was a Princely State. Britishers had given all princely states choice – either to join India or to join Pakistan or even to remain independent.

The ruler of Kashmir during that time (1947) was Maharaja Hari Singh, the great-grandson of Maharaja Gulab Singh. He was a Hindu who ruled over a majority-Muslim princely state.

He did not want to merge with India or Pakistan.

Hari Singh tried to negotiate with India and Pakistan to have an independent status for his state. He offered a proposal of Standstill Agreement to both the Dominion, pending a final decision on State’s accession. On August 12, 1947, the Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir sent identical communications to the Government of India and Pakistan.

Pakistan accepted the offer and sent a communication to J&K Prime Minister on August 15, 1947. It read, “The Government of Pakistan agrees to have Standstill Agreement with Jammu and Kashmir for the continuation of existing arrangements …”

India advised the Maharaja to send his authorized representative to Delhi for further discussion on the offer.

What were Kashmiri people’s aspiration in 1947?

Kashmiri people took part extensively in the Indian Nationalist Movement. They not only wanted to get rid of the British rule but also never wanted to be under the rule of the Dogra dynasty once the nationalist movement achieves its mission. The Kashmiris had prefered democracy to monarchy.

Jammu and Kashmir was always a secular state – with a history of Hindu, Muslim, and Sikh rule. Even though the majority population was Muslims, it then had a significant Hindu population as well.

India in 1947 had suggested conducting a plebiscite to know the aspirations of Kashmiri people. With tall leaders of Jammu and Kashmir like Sheik Abdullah on its side, cherishing the common values – secularism, democracy, and pan-India nationalism – India was confident to win the Plebiscite if it was held in 1947.

India’s stand with Junagadh, another princely state, was also to conduct a plebiscite. In 1947, upon the independence and partition of India, the last Muslim ruler of the Junagadh state, Muhammad Mahabat Khanji III, decided to merge Junagadh into the newly formed Pakistan. The majority of the population were Hindus. The conflict led to many revolts and also a plebiscite, resulting in the integration of Junagadh into India.

However, the Pakistan attack on Kashmir in October 1947 changed all dynamics. The exact aspirations of Kashmiri People at that time is still unknown – as a plebiscite or referendum was never held.

The Pakistan Invasion of Kashmir in 1947

Pakistan, though entered into Standstill Agreement with Jammu and Kashmir, had an eye on it. It broke the Standstill Agreement by sponsoring a tribal militant attack in Kashmir on October 1947.

Pashtun raiders from Pakistan invaded Kashmir in October 1947 and took control over a large area. Hari Singh appealed to the Governor General of free-India, Lord Mountbatten for assistance.

India assured help on condition Hari Singh should sign the Instrument of Accession. Maharaja Hari Singh signed the instrument of accession with India (1947). It was also agreed that once the situation normalised, the views of the people of J&K will be ascertained about their future.

Jammu and Kashmir signs the Instrument of Accession with India

The Maharaja Hari Singh signed Instrument of Accession to India on 26 October 1947 in Srinagar.

As soon as the accession documents were signed, the Indian Armed Force took over the stage to repulse Pakistan-supported tribal assault.

Indian and Pakistani forces thus fought their first war over Kashmir in 1947-48.

India successfully drove out most of the Pak-supported tribal militants from Kashmir occupation. However, one part of the State came under Pakistani control. India claims that this area is under illegal occupation. Pakistan describes this area as ‘Azad Kashmir’. India however, does not recognize this term. India uses the term Pak occupied Kashmir (PoK) for the area of Kashmir under the control of Pakistan.

India brings the United Nations (UN) into the picture

India referred the dispute to the United Nations Security Council on 1 January 1948. Following the set-up of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP), the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on 21 April 1948.

The UN Resolution was non-binding on India and Pakistan. However, this is what the UN resolution mentioned:

UN Resolution on Jammu and Kashmir

The UN resolutions clearly said :

• Pakistan is the aggressor in the state.
• Pakistan has to vacate all occupied territory in state and handover the vacated territory to India.
• India has to remove all its forces leaving aside enough to maintain law and order.
• India to conduct a plebiscite in the state.

Why no Plebiscite or Referendum was held in Kashmir yet?

• The state of Jammu and Kashmir is defined as it existed on or before the invasion of Pakistan on 22nd October 1947. This includes the present territory of Pak occupied Kashmir (POK), Gilgit, Baltistan, Jammu, Laddhak and Kashmir valley.
• Pakistan asked for time to vacate its occupation but it never complied.
• As nearly one-third of the state of Jammu and Kashmir is still under the occupation of Pakistan, it is a noncompliance of conditions leading to the plebiscite.

Sheikh Abdullah’s movement – Formal incorporation of Kashmir into the Indian Union

Kashmir’s first political party, the Muslim Conference, was formed in 1925, with Sheikh Abdullah as president. Later, in 1938, it was renamed as National Conference. The National Conference was a secular organisation and had a long association with the Congress. Sheikh Abdullah was a personal friend of some of the leading nationalist leaders including Nehru.

National Conference started a popular movement to get rid of the Maharaja. Sheikh Abdullah was the leader.

After the Maharaja Hari Singh signed an ‘Instrument of Accession’ with the Government of India, Sheikh Abdullah took over as the Prime Minister of the State of J&K (the head of the government in the State was then called Prime Minister) in March 1948.

Sheikh Abdullah was against Jammu and Kashmir joining Pakistan. However, he took a pro-referendum stance and delayed the formal accession to India. The pro-Indian authorities dismissed the state government and arrested Prime Minister Sheikh Abdullah.

The new Jammu and Kashmir government ratified the accession to India. In 1957, Kashmir was formally incorporated into the Indian Union.

Kashmir Issue – External Disputes

Externally, ever since 1947, Kashmir remained a major issue of conflict between India and Pakistan (and between India and China to a minor extent).

Pakistan has always claimed that Kashmir valley should be part of Pakistan. The conflict resulted in 3 main wars between India and Pakistan – 1947, 1965, and 1971. A war-like situation erupted in 1998 as well (Kargil war).

Pakistan was not only the illegal occupant of the Kashmir region. China too started claiming parts of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir.

By the 1950s, China started to gradually occupy the eastern Kashmir (Aksai Chin). In 1962, India fought a war with China over its encroachments, however, China defeated India. To make matters worse, Pakistan ceded the Trans-Karakoram Tract of Kashmir (Saksham valley) to China.

Kashmir Issue – Internal Disputes

Internally, there is a dispute about the status of Kashmir within the Indian union.

Kashmir was given autonomy and a special status by article 370 in the Indian Constitution. Articles like 370, 371, 35A etc are connected with privileges given to Jammu and Kashmir.

WHAT IS THE SPECIAL STATUS GIVEN TO JAMMU AND KASHMIR?

• Article 370 gives greater autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir compared to the other States of India.
• The State has its own Constitution.
• All provisions of the Indian Constitution are not applicable to the State.
• Laws passed by the Parliament apply to J&K only if the State agrees.
• Non-Kashmiri Indians cannot buy property in Kashmir.

This special status has provoked two opposite reactions.

A SECTION FEELS THAT ARTICLE 370 IS NOT NEEDED!

There is a section of people outside of J&K that believes that the special status of the State conferred by Article 370 does not allow full integration of the State with India. This section feels that Article 370 should, therefore, be revoked and J&K should be like any other State in India.

ANOTHER SECTION FEELS THAT ARTICLE 370 IS NOT ENOUGH!

Another section, mostly Kashmiris, believe that the autonomy conferred by Article 370 is not enough.

MAJOR GRIEVANCES OF KASHMIRIS:

Kashmiris have expressed at least three major grievances.

• First, the promise that Accession would be referred to the people of the State after the situation created by tribal invasion was normalised, has not been fulfilled. They demand a ‘Plebiscite’ at the earliest.
• Secondly, there is a feeling that the special federal status guaranteed by Article 370, has been eroded in practice. This has led to the demand for restoration of autonomy or ‘Greater State Autonomy’.
• Thirdly, it is felt that democracy which is practised in the rest of India has not been similarly institutionalised in the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

Politics since 1948 – Conflict between the Kashmir State Government and the Central Government of India

After taking over as the Prime Minister, Sheikh Abdullah initiated major land reforms and other policies which benefited ordinary people. But there was a growing difference between him and the central government about his position on Kashmir’s status. He was dismissed in 1953 and kept in detention for a number of years.

The leadership that succeeded him did not enjoy as much popular support and was able to rule the State mainly due to the support of
the Centre. There were serious allegations of malpractices and rigging in various elections.

During most of the period between 1953 and 1974, the Congress party exercised a lot of influence on the politics of the State. A truncated National Conference (minus Sheikh Abdullah) remained in power with the active support of Congress for some time but later it merged with the Congress.

Thus the Congress gained direct control over the government in the State.

In the meanwhile, there were several attempts to reach an agreement between Sheikh Abdullah and the Government of India.

Finally, in 1974 Indira Gandhi reached an agreement with Sheikh Abdullah and he became the Chief Minister of the State.

The revival of National Conference (1977)

He revived the National Conference which was elected with a majority in the assembly elections held in 1977.

Sheikh Abdullah died in 1982 and the leadership of the National Conference went to his son, Farooq Abdullah, who became the Chief Minister.

But he was soon dismissed by the Governor and a breakaway faction of the National Conference came to power for a brief period.

The dismissal of Farooq Abdullah’s government due to the intervention of the Centre generated a feeling of resentment in Kashmir. The confidence that Kashmiris had developed in the democratic processes after the accord between Indira Gandhi and Sheikh Abdullah, received a setback.

The feeling that the Centre was intervening in politics of the State was further strengthened when the National Conference in 1986 agreed to have an electoral alliance with the Congress, the ruling party in the Centre.

1987 Assembly Elections, Political Crisis, and Insurgency

It was in this environment that the 1987 Assembly election took place. The official results showed a massive victory for the National Conference-Congress alliance and Farooq Abdullah returned as Chief Minister.

But it was widely believed that the results did not reflect popular choice and that the entire election process was rigged.

A popular resentment had already been brewing in the State against the inefficient administration since the early 1980s. This was now augmented by the commonly prevailing feeling that democratic processes were being undermined at the behest of the Centre. This generated a political crisis in Kashmir which became severe with the rise of the insurgency.

By 1989, the State had come in the grip of a militant movement mobilised around the cause of a separate Kashmiri nation.

The insurgents got moral, material and military support from Pakistan. The balance of influence had decisively tilted in Pakistan’s favour by the late 1980s, with people’s sympathy no longer with the Indian union as it had been in 1947-48, 1965 or 1971.

The terrorists and militants drove out almost all the Hindus from the Kashmir valley, ensuring that a future plebiscite (if it happens) will be meaningless.

India imposed Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) in Jammu and Kashmir by 1990.

For a number of years, the State was under President’s rule and effectively under the control of the armed forces. Throughout the period from 1990, Jammu and Kashmir experienced violence at the hands of the insurgents and through army action.

1990 and beyond – Growing Trust Deficit

After 1987, the pro-India sentiments of Kashmiri people got tilted heavily towards Kashmiri Separatism. Pakistan, of course, added fuel to the fire – by giving moral and financial support to terrorists, militants, and insurgents. As a result, Kashmir frequently witnessed violence, curfew, stone-pelting, and firing between the troops of India and Pakistan across Line of Control (LoC).

Thousands of soldiers, civilians, and militants have been killed in the uprising and the Indian crackdown since 1989.

Even though state elections are conducted, Kashmir has not returned to the normalcy before 1987.

Assembly elections in the State were held only in 1996 in which the National Conference led by Farooq Abdullah came to power with a demand for regional autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir.

J&K experienced a very fair election in 2002. The National Conference failed to win a majority and was replaced by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and Congress coalition government.

In 2015, India’s ruling BJP party is sworn into government in Indian-administered Kashmir for the first time in coalition with local People’s Democratic Party, with the latter’s Mufti Mohammad Sayeed as chief minister (followed by Mehbooba Mufti because of the death of her father and party founder). However, this coalition didn’t last for long.

Even though the Government of India is taking many steps to stop the insurgency and bring Kashmir back to normalcy, the terrorist attacks like that in Pulwama has seriously hindered the peace process.

The Current Stand of India – Regarding Kashmir Question

• No more mediation with the UN or any other other third parties.
• India and Pakistan should resolve issues through bilateral talks as agreed by the Simla Agreement.
• No Plebiscite in Kashmir unless Pakistan reverses the situation back to what was in1947 (territory and demographics).

Who are the Kashmir Separatists?

• All Parties Hurriyat Conference
• Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front
• Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami
• Lashkar-e-Taiba
• Jaish-e-Mohammed
• Hizbul Mujahideen
• Harkat-ul-Mujahideen
• Al-Badr
• Ansar Ghazwat-ul-Hind Flag.png Ansar Ghazwat-ul-Hind (Since 2017)

What do Separatists demand?

Separatist politics which surfaced in Kashmir from 1989 has taken different forms and is made up of various strands.

• There is one strand of separatists who want a separate Kashmiri nation, independent of India and Pakistan.
• Then there are groups that want Kashmir to merge with Pakistan.
• Besides these, there is a third strand which wants greater autonomy for the people of the state within the Indian union.

Demand for intra-state autonomy

Even though the name of the state is Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), it comprises three social and political regions: Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh.

• Jammu – The Jammu region is a mix of foothills and plains, of Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs and speakers of various languages.
• Kashmir – Kashmir Valley is the heart of the Kashmir region. The people are Kashmiri speaking and are mostly Muslims. There is also a small Kashmiri speaking Hindu minority.
• Ladakh – The Ladakh region is mountainous, has a very little population which is equally divided between Buddhists and Muslims. Ladakh is divided into two main regions – Leh and Kargil.

It should also be noted that out of the 3 main administrative divisions – Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh – insurgency and demand for independence are high only in the Kashmir Valley. Most of the people in Jammu and Ladakh still wish to be part of India, even though they demand autonomy in a different way. They often complain of neglect and backwardness. The demand intra-State autonomy is as strong as the demand for State autonomy in regions of Jammu and Ladakh.

Urge for Peace

The initial period of popular support to militancy has now given way to the urge for peace.

The Centre has started negotiations with various separatist groups. Instead of demanding a separate nation, most of the separatists in dialogue are trying to re-negotiate a relationship of the State with India.

Conclusion

The Kashmir issue – which was once a simple one, has now turned a complex problem to solve. It has multiple dimensions – external and internal; inter-state as well as intra-state. Not even the separatists are on the same ground – their demands are different.

The princely state of Jammu and Kashmir which was under the control of British India – is now not entirely with India. Pakistan and China too now occupy a significant portion of the terrorities of the erstwhile princely state.

Of course, the Kashmir problem also includes the issue of Kashmiri identity known as Kashmiriyat. However, almost every state in India has its own identity – Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, West Bengal or Kerala. However, the people in each of these states even when seeing themselves as Tamilians, Kannadagans, Bengalis or Malayalis are also able to see the bigger picture – they identify themselves as Indians.

Jammu and Kashmir is one of the living examples of plural society and politics. Not only are there diversities of all kind (religious, cultural, linguistic, ethnic, tribal) but there are also divergent political aspirations.

Unfortunately, from the perspective of the youth of Kashmir, there is a growing trust-deficit. It’s a hard reality that Jammu and Kashmir never functioned like other Indian states since its accession to India. It had given higher autonomy initially, however it got eroded in practice.

The first step to solve the Kashmir issue is to identify the problems behind the alienation of Kashmir. Here are some of them:

• Mishandling of the Kashmir Issue by the successive Central governments of India – which includes frequent dismissal of State Assemblies.
• The state governments of Kashmir failed to distribute the benefits of growth and development to every area of the Kashmir.
• The terrorist and military outfits in Pakistan has been distancing the youth of Kashmir from the democratic form of the Indian government.
• The regular presence of the Indian Armed Force or CAPF in the Kashmir interiors, and the misuse of provisions like ASFPA.

To find a solution to Kashmir issue – all stakeholders should be considered.

Kashmir was and still is an integral part of India. It has a plural and secular culture – just like the rest of India. Urgent steps should be taken to bridge the gaps of trust deficit in the minds of Kashmiri youth. All Kashmiris should get the due share in the growth story of India. Like all other states in India, there should be adequate political autonomy in Jammu and Kashmir.

Violence, terrorism, and killings are never the answer – be it on any side. What do you think?