- The Mahalwari System was a way the British collected land revenue in north India. It started in 1822 under Holt Mackenzie and was later spread widely by James Thomason in the North-Western Provinces and by Martin Bird, who is often called the father of land reforms in north India. Under this system, a village or a group of villages, known as a mahal, was treated as one unit for revenue, instead of dealing with a single landlord or each farmer on his own. It covered close to 30% of British India, mainly Punjab, the United Provinces and the North-Western Provinces.
- Village treated as one unit : The land revenue of the whole mahal was fixed together in one go, not farmer by farmer.
- Gram sabha as the owner : The village assembly was recognised as the owner of the land, while farmers kept the right to cultivate their own fields.
- Headman collected the revenue : A lambardar or a group of village elders gathered the money from farmers and paid it to the British.
- Revenue was not permanent : It was reassessed every 20 to 30 years instead of being fixed forever, unlike Bengal's Permanent Settlement.
- Fields were surveyed first : Officials measured the land and estimated its produce before deciding how much revenue to charge.
- Revenue rate kept changing : It began at a harsh 80%, was cut to 66% by William Bentinck, and later reduced further to about 60% by Dalhousie under the Saharanpur rules.
This system left a deep mark on peasants and village life:
- Farmers were exploited: The high revenue demand, especially in the early years, left ordinary cultivators with very little for themselves.
- A new class of landlords: Even though land was owned jointly by the village, richer farmers took on the role of landlords and grabbed land belonging to smaller ones.
- Growing debt and land loss: Regular heavy payments pushed many peasants toward moneylenders, and a lot of them eventually lost their land.
- Breakdown of village unity: When some farmers could not or would not pay their revenue, it hurt the whole village and weakened the old social bonds of the community.
- Unfair shared burden: Since the whole mahal was jointly responsible, poorer farmers often had to cover the share of those who defaulted.
- In short, the Mahalwari System kept the village structure alive on the surface, but in reality it burdened peasants with heavy revenue, gave rise to a new class of powerful landlords, and gradually broke down the old sense of community in Indian villages.