How was the mahalwari system different from the Permanent Settlement?

1. Revenue Collection Unit:
– Permanent Settlement: Revolved around Zamindars as revenue collectors.
– Mahalwari System: Revenue collected directly from villages or mahals.

2. Nature of Revenue Assessment:
– Permanent Settlement: Fixed land revenue rates without periodic revisions.
– Mahalwari System: Allowed for periodic reassessment based on land productivity.

3. Role of Landlords:
– Permanent Settlement: Zamindars held hereditary rights over revenue collection and land ownership.
– Mahalwari System: No intermediary landlords; revenue collection managed by village communities or individual landholders.

4. Flexibility in Revenue Collection:
– Permanent Settlement: Fixed rates posed challenges during agricultural fluctuations.
– Mahalwari System: Permitted adjustments based on changes in agricultural productivity or village conditions.

5. Impact on Peasants:
– Permanent Settlement: Peasants faced challenges due to fixed revenue demands set by Zamindars.
– Mahalwari System: Direct interaction with the government potentially reduced exploitation by intermediaries.

6. Geographical Application:
– Permanent Settlement: Implemented in Bengal, Bihar, Odisha, Varanasi, and other areas.
– Mahalwari System: Implemented in regions like parts of Central India, the Punjab, and North India.

These differences highlight contrasting methods of revenue collection, assessment, and landlord involvement between the Mahalwari System and the Permanent Settlement, impacting the socio-economic structure in their respective regions.