1

CHAPTER - 1
INTRODUCTION

In recent years there has been a great deal of writing on the economic and
agrarian society to a large extent to our understanding of the evolution of peasant
society. It may be pointed out that there is detailed and concrete historical research
into different regions. However, the available studies reveal that the performance of
Indian agricultural economy varied from province to province the devotement of
agriculture varied from region to region.

In my thesis, I will provide on various aspects of the agrarian history, viz.,

tenure systems the nature of land revenue / rent demand, evolution of land market,
Rural credit, Demographic condition and so on. A vacuum exists between the
landlords and peasants. There was increase of debt by the peasants. This was due to
accumulation of interest. When the debt could not be repaid or settled from many
years, the accumulation of interest must have been principle factors for swelling up of
the debt of the peasantry.1

C.J. Baker in his work the Politics of South Indian argued that the dominated
men of the village formed very distinct elite in the rural areas. The members of the
village elite loomed large in the rural economy. Most of the other members of the
village depended upon them for their livelihood. The village leaders were the patrons

of the many different artisans and other service castes and employed many of the
village laborers on their home farms. Many of the villagers had at sometime or the
other, to come to the village bosses for a loan.2

The period witnessed turmoil due to an agrarian unrest due to many reasons,
volume of debt was one of the reasons, which led to landless, finally culminating in
armed struggle by the rural poor. Agricultural production is very much determined by
factors like the size of the holdings of land, pattern of land distribution, irrigation
facilities, types of cultivation and the methods employed, and also the extent and
manner in which agricultural credit and debt relief is organized. The influence of
these factors could be seen only when there was sufficient amount of rainfall and the
land was not visited by any epidemic or internal catastrophe either political or
economical. The economic has a direct and immediate bearing on the conditions of
the crops.3

On account of the increase in the value of land and also the lack of suitable
and remunerative subsidiary occupations, more and number of people began to
depend, as years rolled by, on land for their living. On contract to this, big landlords
Deshmukhs who owned entire villages found it profitable to let their vast lands on
lease and themselves take up non-cultivation occupations like excise contracts, money
and grain lending, lending of mills etc. both these developments, combined with the
exercise of the rights of inheritance, sale and transfer of land to pattedars led to the
holdings, both occupant and cultivation becoming smaller in size from year to year.4

The princely state of Hyderabad with its vast area, plentiful resources and a
large population, different ethical and administrative divisions, some larger than the
average Indian states, legitimately entitled it to the traditional name of The
Dominions of His Exalted Highness: It covered an area which was more than the
area of England and Scotland put together. It was the biggest princely state in the
British Empire. The state had an interesting historical background.

Topographically, covering an area of 82,698 sq. miles the Nizams Dominion

was situated between 15o 10 and 20o 40 north latitude and 74o 4 and 81o 35 east
longitude. It occupied the central position of the table land of the Deccan. It was
bound on the north by Khandesh tract of the Bombay province and Berar, on the east
central provinces, Bastar state and madras province, on the south by madras province
and on the west by Bombay province. The state had its own coinage, currency notes,
postage stamps as well as separate railway system.

Roughly speaking the flow of the river Manjira, an important river tributary of
Godavari, was the line that divided the main geological formation found in the state
viz., the trappeian in the north-western portion and the Archaean in the southern
portion. The trappeian area with its very fertile plains of black cotton soil growing
cotton, wheat and jowar crops was inhabitated by the Marathi speaking Aryan people
and hence was known as Marathwada. The Archaean area with less fertile undulating
red soil growing rice, millet and oil seeds was inhabited by the Telugu speaking
Dravidian race and hence known as Telangana. Broadly speaking, the Dominion a

polygonal compact block of fertile soil had an added advantage of being almost
surrounded on its north, east, southern and south-western boundaries by the two
mighty rivers of Krishna and Godavari and their tributaries. Agriculture was the
principle industry of the state. Being surrounded by the British province on almost all
sides, the socio, political, cultural and other developments in these areas have had
their own impact on the population in the Nizams Dominions. Any description of the
cultural life of the Nizams Dominions is incomplete without the impact of the British
on the social and political life of the Dominions.

The Asaf Jahi Dynasty, established in 1724 A.D., ruled over the Deccan for a
little over two centuries for nine generations until the territory merged in the Indian
union in 1948 A.D.5 The type of rule of the Nizams over the territories varied from
time to time depending upon the conditions that prevailed at different times. During
the early period, especially during the period of the Asaf Jah-I, the founder of the
dynasty, the Nizam was all powerful. His firmans were the laws of the land
unquestioned by his subjects. However, the situation changed, in course of time,
considerably.

Immediately after the rule of Nizam-ul-Mulk Asaf Jah there was

instability and turmoil over a decade, because of the rivalries among his successors.
During this period of turmoil the importance of the monarch came to be reduced.
Taking full advantage of the instability of the Nizams the Diwans or the Prime
Ministers at times usurped even the powers of the state. The Diwans were appointed
and removed from office by the Nizam himself.

Besides the influence of the Prime Ministers on the exercise of authority by

the Nizam there were other important factors which to some extent or the other,
curtailed the powers of the Nizams, among such factors the influence of the British
could be rated high. As mentioned earlier at times the ministers, with the support of
the British Resident, ruled the Dominions after making the Nizam a spectator.
Secondly, the presence of powerful Jagirdars some of whom belonged to royal
families also acted as an important limitation to the absolute powers of the Nizam.

On the economic front the Nizam was considered to be the richest man not
only in the whole country but even the whole world at one time and paradoxically
enough his subjects were rated, at the same time, among the poorest in the country.
For a very long time the Nizam was interested only in collecting taxes from his
subjects. The average yield from the lands was very minimal and no attempt was
made by the Government to provide irrigational facilities for the land. In the absence
of a well organized system

of administration a bunch of middlemen bled the

agriculturists to death with unreasonably high land taxes, consequently, the poor ryots
often deserted their villages and ran away only to be brought back by force. At the
same time the nobles indulged in vulgar display of wealth and immersed themselves
in extravagance.6 The Jagirdars, entrusted with the collection of revenues exploited
the opportunity and troubled people.7

Land revenue formed the core of the state finance, the collection of which was
the responsibility of Taluqdar. The taluqdar in turn assigned these duties to tahsildars

who were exacting the ryots. It is generally argued that urbanization and economic
development reinforce each other. Structural changes in the economy are generally
associated with urbanization which in its turn stimulates economic changes. Rapid
economic progress has tempted many writers to regard economic development and
urbanization as an interwoven process.8

Land revenue in the Diwani areas (government) of the Nizams Dominions

were collected through contractors called Talukdars, Deshmukhs and Deshpandes to
whom territories were framed out. There were two systems known as the Taah-HudDari and the sarbasta. Under the former, the right of collection of revenue was given
to men of influence and position living in Hyderabad city and under the latter it was
allotted to the Zamindars. At times, district was framed out to more than one person
from each of whom a Nazar was collected. There was also a third system known as
Amani under which the Government dealt with the ryots directly Land revenue was
collected in kind and crops were not allowed to be harvested till the revenue was paid
or a letter of credit from a banker produced. The ryots were also subjected to much
hardship on account of the injurious effects of several other systems such as the
Takdema, Battai a part of the revenue. Some of them are Detaille given in the
following chapters. The peasants unable to bear the tyranny often abandoned their
lands and deserted their villages.9

The revenue from the sarf-e-khas villages went to the privy purse of the
Nizam. These villages were administered by a separate department, the head of which

was called sardul-mohan sarf-e-khas who worked directly under the Nizam. A major
portion of Hyderabad district consists of ex-jagir villages in the taluqs of Tandur and
Vikarabad, and ex sarf-e-khas villages in the taluqs of Medchal, Chevella (old
Shahbad) and Hyderabad. Soon after the merger of the Nizam state with the Indian
union in 1948, the sarf-e-khas and the jagirs were abolished in 1949. After the
formation of Andhra Pradesh, a fresh survey of the Telangana districts was found
necessary consequently, the Andhra Pradesh survey and Boundaries Act of 1923
(Previously known as the Madras survey and Boundaries Act of 1923) was extended
to the Telangana region in 1958.10 Minimum wages for agricultural laborers were
governed by the minimum wages act of 1948. Farm servants known as Baghelas or
Palellu are given their annual wages in kind.11 The other source of revenue with an
interesting history regarding its administration is the Abkari. The system of Abkari
administration in the Nizams Dominions was rather complicated with its peculiar
maurusi (hereditary) shops, potstills, the jagirs and gulmohwa problems for their
rights of distillation. In Diwani territories, the right of collecting mohwa flowers and
seeds, manufacture and sale of liquor were sold by auction. A commission was set up
in 1907 to enquire into the Abkari rights of the Jagirdars.12

Jagirs was a tenure in which the public revenues of a given tract of land were
made over to a servant of the state, together with the powers requisite to enable him to
collect and appropriate such revenue and administer the general government of the
area. The assignment was either conditional or unconditional. Illiteracy, ill-health,
poverty and low productivity form a vicious circle which in turn, leads to economic

underdevelopment. The tribal condition in the Warangal suba and Adilabad,

Karimnagar was so pathetic. The prominent aboriginal tribes and hill tribes of Gonds,
koyas, banjaras and hill reddies had been so widely prevalent in Warangal and
Adilabad.13 Excepting the Banjaras which was an immigrant tribe from Rajputana at
the time of Mughal conquest,14 all other aboriginal tribesmen of the area, right until
1946-47, got subjected to severe exploitation at the hands of the varied agencies that
dealt with them such as the watandars, forest officials, non-aboriginal immigrant
landlords and money-lenders, which resulted in the expropriation of the former, both
in land and their earnings in cash and kind.15

Peasant revolt was popularly known as the Telangana struggle, figures

prominently in the economic history of the suba. The taluqs of Mahboobabad,
Khammam, Madhira, Palvancha, Yellandu and Mulugu in the Warangal district,
Sirisilla, Jagityal, Mahadeopur, Huzurabad and Sultanabad in Karimnagar District,
and Chennoor, Luxettipet and Sirpur in Adilabad District, got mainly involved in this
struggle, led by the communists, it was directed first against the dominant feudal
elements of jagirdars and deshmukhs, and in the next stage against the rich peasants.16

Land for landless peasants, tenants, ownership rights for cultivation tenants,
better wages for agricultural labourers, freedom from landlord oppression from small
and middle peasants, Razakar atrocities for rich peasants and the united desire of
these and other sections of the rural population for the removal of the much hated
Jagirdari and Deshmukhi oppression. As the continuation of these evils was

associated with the Nizams rule, the longing for the removal of the former
tantamount to change the latter also. Revenge and retribution for the misdeeds and
the misery that was inflicted in the past by the aristocracy and the regime was also
very much noticeable during the course of the Resistance.17

The dynamics of power and authority are examined against the background of
the historically changing relationship between land, power and people. Such an
examination involves a process of demystification of power and authority. There
could be many ways of doing this: the basic and the fundamental way, however, are
through the study of the rural elite and the agrarian power structure.

Historically, this schema of the causal interaction between the rural elite and
the agrarian power structure has not been static. It shows a changing nexus of
compliance and contradiction in agrarian society. Such a nexus can, it is proposed, be
empirically comprehended around three loci the land, the power and the people in
agrarian society. For us, land, power and people are not heuristic categories. They
are grass-roots empirical variables and offer clues to the understanding of the
dynamics of the agrarian social structure in general, and of the rural elites and the
agrarian power structure in particular. Let us briefly discuss the relevance of these
variables.

The discussion on the issues relating to the substantive and methodological

problems of the rural elite and agrarian power structure in general and the conceptual

10

analysis of some studies in particular, provide the backdrop for our analysis. Before
we spell out the premises and the problems of our study, a working definition of the
rural elite may be formulated. We tentatively define the rural elite as an enduring
minority of rural population with relatively independent potential for power and
domination, which exercises control over people in the setting of the agrarian social
structure.

This definition lays more emphasis on the institutional and structural aspects
of power and influence rather than on its manifestations in positions or offices. It
treats the elite not as an abstracted nominal category but as a concrete social entity
embedded in the community power structure of agrarian society. The emphasis is on
substantive historical processes rather than on the formal uses of conceptual schema.
The structural locus of power, viewed in the context of history, impinges upon the
need to know the whole before one tries to know its component parts. It was this
perspective which was generally neglected in most earlier studies on leadership and
rural elites in India. Concepts such as aristocracy, political class, social formation and
institutional bases of power brought to us by political scientists and sociologists
continue to hold promise in the study of rural elites. These concepts provide the link
between historical forces and the formation of social processes that give rise to elites
in society.

The dynamics of rural power structure and its social and economic processes
are, to a considerable extent, manifested by the interplay of the social forces that bring

11

these two categories of elites into situations of interaction, conflict and competition.
We shall make use of these two conceptual types of elites throughout our study, for
the analytical treatment of field data on contemporary elites and agrarian power
structure.
So I gave a glimpse of what all I desire to put before you in my thesis has
been shown in the above paragraphs. In my succeeding chapters, I give a detail
description of land, caste and power in the Telangana region from 1883 to 1948 A.D.

AREA OF STUDY:

This study refers to Telangana region during the period between 1883 -1948.
The region being primarily agricultural, the pride of place in economic relations is
occupied by its land system. Conditions of agricultural production are, to a great
extent, determined by the relation that existed between the owners and cultivators of
land, and the rights and status of the actual cultivators. Land revenue system to a
greater extent, the prosperity of agriculture depended on how these items were
administered in this region.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

Preliminary review of literature includes writings such as Economic History of

Hyderabad State Warangal Suba 1911-1950 (1984), written by V. Ramakrishna
Reddy.

This book clearly explains the agrarian systems, land revenue and

12

administrative reforms during the period of Nizams rule particularly in Warangal

suba, consists four districts Warangal, Karimnagar, Adilabad, Mahaboobnagar.
Another book is State Economy and Social Transformation Hyderabad State 17241948 (2002), written by Vaikuntam, Y., provides information on Ryotwari System
and reforms introduced by Salarjung.

It argues that economy suffered, feudal

institutions continued and the impact of the indirect rule and the colonial policies
affected the Hyderabad state in many fronts including economy.

Another important source of my study, based on Society, Economy and Polity

in Modern Andhra (2007), written by A. Satyanarayana the first section of this book
is about the agrarian society and economy. It traces the evolution of the dominant
class of landlords under British Rule, their relationship with tenantry and their
eventual decay with the advent of the market economy to which they were unable to
adopt themselves. These essays focus upon the material basis of upper caste power
and authority at the grass roots level in the rural Telangana during the pre1948
period. Barry Paviar, The Telangana Movement 1944-51 (1981), explains the
Deshmukhs and their dominant position in the rural economy.

Telangana Peoples Struggle and Its Lessons (2006) by P. Sundarayya. In this

book he explains the socio-economic life of the people of Hyderabad, especially in
Telangana was the unbridled feudal exploitation that persisted well-high till the
beginning of the Telangana armed peasant struggle. Finances and Fiscal Policy of
Hyderabad (1900-1956) written by Narayan, B.K. He explains the insular policy of

13

the Nizams and their administration, resulted in adopting a closed policy even in
the economic sphere.

Against Dora and Nizam People Movement in Telangana 1939-1948 written

by Thirumali Inukonda, in this book an attempt is made to present the doras, the
chillarollu and Kapu, in terms of class relationships and their conflicting life patterns.
The crucial to the movement was the transformation of the deshmukhs as doras and
consequent imposition of values and authority of domination. And also explains how
the peasants and labourers blindly did not agree the domination of Doras, and it
provides the evidences of peoples movement in Telangana.
The reports of H.E.H., The Nizams Government General Administrative
Reports and Annual Administrative Reports of the Department of Agriculture, gives
the details of the state agriculture and administration during this period.

OBJECTIVES:
a)

To provide certain insights into the working of Land Lordism in

Telangana at the grass roots level.

b)

To study multi-dimensionality of caste and to integrate the caste system

into the analysis of agrarian relations.

c)

To study how the caste system played a crucial role in allocating and
other resources in the rural economy.

d)

To study what were the important factors led to their power.

14

e)

To study what were the manifold failures of the government and finally
these sufferings of the people at large, led to the Telangana

armed

struggle.
HYPOTHESIS:

a)

The Deshmukhs and Deshpandes continued to enjoy their dominant

position in the rural economy.

b)

By the time of introduction of Ryotwari System in Telangana region,

there was a gradual decrease in cultivation.

Therefore, certain

modifications were introduced in the Ryotwari System in Telangana

particularly in relinquishing the lands. Several changes were made in
the land tenure due to the Ryotwari System introduced by Salarjung.
c)

In the twentieth century, a number of reforms have been introduced to

streamline finances and agriculture. The Hyderabad Land Revenue Act
was passed in 1908 and some other acts were also passed. This study
examines how these items were administered.

d)

A close and in depth examination of the economic history of the region.

e)

The study also aims to analyze landlord power and authority land
holding pattern and caste system of this region.

15

CHAPTERIZATION:

My thesis is divided into six chapters including Introduction and Conclusion.

They are:
1.

Introduction: It is concerned with the in depth examination of the

Economic History of Telangana region during 1883-1948. To provide
certain insights into the working of land lordism in Telangana.

2.

Agrarian Society in Telangana: In this chapter aims to analyze the

agrarian structure and the land holding pattern in Telangana during
Nizams rule broadly corresponded to the caste system. And it explains
how the traditional agrarian system of Telangana landed property was
concentrated among certain castes.

3.

Power and Authority in the Countryside: This chapter aims to analyze

landlord power and authority in the countryside where land was the
most important possession, the only recognized wealth, which was
closely linked with power and authority over dependent caste groups
and it explains what are the factors led to their power.

4.

Resistance to Dominance: It explains the important factors which

sustained landlord domination over the peasantry. It noted that apart
from tenancy, credit, coercion and physical force, caste and kinship
networks as well as the watandari system worked as the most effective
agencies of landlord domination in Telangana.

16

5.

Dynamics of Social Transformation: In this chapter, it examines what

are the changes were made in the land tenure due to the Ryotwari
System. The feudal institutions, land concentration, social inequalities
and exploitation had a lot of bearing on socio-economic transformation
and they were primarily responsible for its backwardness.

6.

Conclusion: In the conclusion, to study the manifold failures of the

government and to study how these sufferings of the people at large,
led to the Telangana Armed Struggle.

METHODOLOGY:

The study focuses on the agrarian structure and the land holding pattern in
Telangana during Nizams rule broadly corresponded to the caste system. Also it
examines in the countryside where land was the most important possession, the only
recognized wealth, which was closely linked with power and authority over
dependent caste groups.

The study is based on Primary and Secondary Sources of Data. For Primary
Sources, it depends on Annual Administrative reports of the department of
Agriculture, H.E.H the Nizams Government General Administrative reports and
Area under tenancy surveyed by the Tenancy Committee, and Caste and Occupation
census Reports Hyderabad. For Secondary Sources, I would like to make use of
available material including books and visiting libraries.

17

REFERENCES
1

Satyanarayana, A., Andhra Peasants under British Rule, Manohar Publications,

New Delhi, 1990, p.2

Baker, C.J., The Politics of South India, Cambridge, 1976, p.88.

Reddy, Ramakrishna, V., Economic History of Hyderabad State, Delhi, 1987,

p.163.

Ibid., pp.163-4.

Ranga Rao, Bhanumathi, Land Revenue Administration in the Nizams Dominions,

Osmania University, 1992, pp. i-iv.

Ibid., pp. iv-vi.

Rao, Manikya, V., Hyderabad Swatantrodyama Charitra, Published by the

Freedom Fighters Association, Gandhi Bhavan, Hyderabad, 1984, pp.13-14.

Reddy, Laxma, R, Growth of Urbanization in Hyderabad State 1891-1950,

Unpublished Thesis, Hyderabad, 1996, pp.8-11.

Andhra Pradesh District Gazetteers, Hyderabad, 1983, p.149.

10

Ibid., p.151.

11

Ibid., pp.152-4.

12

Andhra Pradesh District Gazetteer, Medak, 1976, pp.105-9.

13

1941 Census, Part II, p.680.

14

Syed Khaja Abdul Gafoor, Tribes and Tribal welfare in Hyderabad, Government
Press, Hyderabad-Dn, 1953, p.49.

18

15

Reddy, Ramakrishna, V., Economic History of Warangal Subah 1911-1957, New

Delhi, 1987, p.622.

16

Thirumali, I., Against Dora and Nizam, Peoples Movement in Telangana 1939-48
A.D., Kanishka, Delhi, 2003, p.95.

17

Sundarayya, P., Telangana Peoples Struggle and Its Lessons, Calcutta, 1972,
pp.183-4, 7, 8.

***