Question

the ryotwari system was a better than revenue system then the mahalwari and the zamindari system of permanent settlement give arguments for and against the statement​

Answer 1

out of all three Permanent settlement was most exploitative and Mahalwari and Rayotwari was little lesser.

Here is argument for

• it was influanced by utaliterian philosophy, as utaliterian were against monopolistic practices.
• it was almost similar to traditional Indian settlement.
• peasant got the land ownership, they were no longer in fear to loose it.
• various factors were taken into consideration in deciding the tax, like fertility of soil, types of crops etc.
• tax cloud be paid either cash or kind.
• if peasant disagree to the tax, they had the option to left the land uncultivated.

Argument against

• despite having so many good provisions, that wasn't implemented in real practices.
• survey and measurement was cumbersome, hence not followed in practice. because of these actual burden was much more than they seemed to be seen through tax slab.
• poverty, unemployment, hunger became widespread in Rayotwari area.
• in a survey in 1855, it was found that, only 14.5 million acre was cultivated and 18 million acre was lying fallow.