Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The Permanent Settlement was a land revenue system introduced by Lord Cornwallis in 1793 in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. It aimed to create a stable revenue source for the British East India Company.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The primary objective and benefit of the Permanent Settlement for the East India Company was to ensure a stable and fixed income. The revenue to be paid by the zamindars (landlords) was fixed in perpetuity. This meant that regardless of agricultural output or price fluctuations, the Company was guaranteed a fixed sum annually, which simplified their financial planning and administration.
Let's look at the other options:
(A) is incorrect because the settlement fixed the revenue, it did not increase the burden on the company; the burden was on the zamindars to collect and pay it.
(B) is incorrect as the system was often exploitative, leading to peasant distress rather than cooperation.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The main advantage for the company was securing a fixed and regular revenue stream. This corresponds to option (iii) in the original image, which is option (C).
”The British element is gone, but they have left the mischief behind”
It is no use saying that we ask for separate electorates, because it is good for us. We have heard it long enough. We have heard it for years, and as a result of this agitation we are now a separate nation ... Can you show me one free country where there are separate electorates? If so, I shall be prepared to accept it. But in this unfortunate country if this separate electorate is going to be persisted in, even after the division of the country, woe betide the country; it is not worth living in. Therefore, I say, it is not for my good alone, it is for your own good that I say it, forget the past. One day, we may be united ... The British element is gone, but they have left the mischief behind. We do not want to perpetuate that mischief. (Hear, hear). When the British introduced this element they had not expected that they will have to go so soon. They wanted it for their easy administration. That is all right. But they have left the legacy behind. Are we to get out of it or not?
Charkha
What I object to, is the craze for machinery as such. The craze is for what they call labour-saving machinery. Men go on ”saving labour”, till thousands are without work and thrown on the open streets to die of starvation. I want to save time and labour, not for a fraction of mankind, but for all; I want the concentration of wealth, not in the hands of few, but in the hands of all. YOUNG INDIA, 13 NOVEMBER 1924 Khaddar does not seek to destroy all machinery but it does regulate its use and check its weedy growth. It uses machinery for the service of the poorest in their own cottages. The wheel is itself an exquisite piece of machinery. YOUNG INDIA, 17 MARCH 1927
Match List-I with List-II:
| List-I (Leaders) | List-II (Regions) |
|---|---|
| (A) Shah Mal | (I) Pargana Barout in Uttar Pradesh |
| (B) Gonoo | (II) Singhbhum in Chotanagpur |
| (C) Birjis Qadr | (III) Awadh |
| (D) Kunwar Singh | (IV) Arrah in Bihar |
Choose the correct answer from the options given below: