Which one of the following statements is not true about Ijarah system?
- (a)It was a system of revenue farming.
- (b)It encouraged the role of middlemen.
- (c)Under this system, land revenue was fixed for the peasant.
- (d)The ijaradar paid a fixed amount to the State treasury.
Correct — C, 'Under this system, land revenue was fixed for the peasant.' Ijarah (ijaradari) was revenue farming — the right to collect land revenue from an area was auctioned to the highest bidder, the ijaradar, who paid the State a fixed sum and then extracted as much as he could from the cultivators. Because his profit was whatever he could squeeze above that fixed payment, the peasant's burden was open-ended and often ruinous — anything but fixed. Statements (a), (b) and (d) describe the system accurately, so the 'fixed for the peasant' claim is the false one.
- (a)It was a system of revenue farming. — True and therefore not the exception — ijaradari is the classic term for revenue farming.
- (b)It encouraged the role of middlemen. — True — the ijaradar was precisely a revenue middleman between the State and the peasant, so this correctly describes the system.
- (d)The ijaradar paid a fixed amount to the State treasury. — True — the revenue farmer contracted to pay the State a fixed sum; whatever he collected from peasants above that was his own profit.
Under revenue farming (ijaradari), the State auctioned the right to collect revenue to the highest bidder. The only fixed amount was the sum the ijaradar owed the treasury, not the peasant's dues. The system spread across eighteenth-century Mughal successor states and early colonial Bengal (associated with Murshid Quli Khan).
The question asks for the statement that is NOT true. Three options describe genuine features of the system; the exception is the one that inverts who bore a 'fixed' amount — it was the State's dues from the farmer that were fixed, not the peasant's liability.
- Ijarah/ijaradari was a system of revenue farming — auctioning revenue-collection rights to the highest bidder.
- The ijaradar paid the State a fixed amount and kept the surplus he extracted.
- It multiplied intermediaries (middlemen) between the State and the cultivator.
- Peasants had no fixed, protected assessment and were frequently over-exploited.
- Rejecting option (a) or (d) because they sound negative — those are accurate descriptions; the false one is (c).
- Assuming any 'fixed' element protected the peasant — the fixity applied only to the State's share.
'Which statement is not correct/true' about a revenue system, or matching revenue terms to their features.
Which one of the following statements is NOT correct?
- (a) Ali Mardan Khan introduced the system of revenue farming in Bengal
- (b) Maharaja Ranjit Singh set up modern foundries to manufacture cannons at Lahore
- (c) Sawai Jai Singh of Amber had Euclid's 'Elements of Geometry' translated into Sanskrit
- (d) Sultan Tipu of Mysore gave money for the construction of the idol of Goddess Sarda in the Sringeri temple
Answer(a) Ali Mardan Khan introduced the system of revenue farming in Bengal
Same concept — revenue farming (ijaradari). UPSC's key point is that it was Murshid Quli Khan, not Ali Mardan Khan, who brought revenue farming to Bengal; this NDA item tests what the ijarah system actually did to the peasant.
- practice — not a real PYQ
In the ijaradari system, the person who obtained the right to collect revenue by outbidding others was the
- (a)zamindar
- (b)ijaradar
- (c)jagirdar
- (d)diwan
Answer(b) ijaradar — the revenue farmer who paid the State a fixed sum and collected from peasants.
- practice — not a real PYQ
The 'fixed amount' in the ijarah system referred to
- (a)the revenue every peasant had to pay
- (b)the sum the ijaradar paid to the State treasury
- (c)the salary of village officials
- (d)the export duty on grain
Answer(b) the sum the ijaradar paid to the State treasury — the peasant's burden was not fixed.