Against which of the following hardships and privations the Peasants and the Indian nationalists, under the leadership of the Congress, engineer a great struggle?

1. Colonial Land Revenue Settlements: Permanent, Ryotwari, and Mahalwari (basic)

To understand why peasants eventually rose in rebellion across India, we must first look at the financial backbone of the British Empire: Land Revenue. Before the British, revenue was often a flexible share of the actual harvest. However, the East India Company needed a fixed, predictable income to fund its wars and trade. This led to the creation of three distinct systems that fundamentally altered Indian rural society.

The first was the Permanent Settlement (Bengal, 1793), where Zamindars were recognized as owners of the land in exchange for paying a fixed sum to the State forever. In contrast, the Ryotwari System (South and West India) bypassed middlemen to settle directly with the individual peasant or ryot. The peasant was given a patta (ownership document), but this didn't make them independent. As noted by scholars, the peasant soon realized that many small Zamindars had simply been replaced by one "Giant Zamindar" — the British State Modern India, Bipin Chandra, p.105. Finally, the Mahalwari System (North and Central India) treated the entire village community (the Mahal) as a single unit for revenue collection, making the village headmen or families collectively responsible Modern India, Bipin Chandra, p.105.

Feature	Permanent Settlement	Ryotwari System	Mahalwari System
Settlement with	Zamindars (Landlords)	Individual Ryots (Peasants)	Village Community (Mahal)
Revenue Amount	Fixed permanently	Revised every 20-30 years	Periodically revised
Primary Region	Bengal, Bihar, Odisha	Madras, Bombay, Assam	Punjab, NWFP, Central India

The most devastating feature of these colonial systems was their rigidity. Revenue had to be paid in cash and on time, regardless of whether the monsoon failed or a famine struck. While the Ryotwari system theoretically gave peasants ownership, the Government retained the right to enhance revenue at will Indian Economy, Vivek Singh, p.191. When a peasant could not pay, the State did not offer remission (relief); instead, it put the land up for sale to recover arrears Modern India, Bipin Chandra, p.185-186. This forced peasants into the clutches of moneylenders, planting the seeds for future mass movements and Satyagrahas.

Sources: Modern India, Bipin Chandra (NCERT 1982 ed.), The Structure of the Government and the Economic Policies of the British Empire in India, 1757—1857, p.105; Modern India, Bipin Chandra (NCERT 1982 ed.), Economic Impact of the British Rule, p.185-186; Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24), Land Reforms, p.191

2. Early Peasant Resistance (1857–1900) (intermediate)

After the 1857 Uprising, peasant resistance in India underwent a structural shift. While the earlier phase was often characterized by spontaneous outbursts, the period between 1857 and 1900 saw movements that were more organized, focused on specific economic grievances, and increasingly used legal and non-violent methods. The two pillars of this era were the Indigo Revolt in the East and the Deccan Riots in the West.

The Indigo Revolt (1859–60) in Bengal was a direct response to the oppressive tinkathia-like systems where European planters forced peasants to grow indigo instead of food crops like rice. Planters used a system of fraudulent contracts and small cash advances (dadan) to trap farmers in a cycle of debt. Once a peasant signed, they were legally bound to cultivate indigo on their best land for a pittance History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 1, p.3. Led by figures like Digambar Biswas and Bishnu Biswas, the peasants launched a "non-cultivation" strike and physically resisted the planters' private militias (lathiyals). This movement was unique because it received significant support from the Indian intelligentsia; for instance, Dinabandhu Mitra’s play Neel Darpan (1860) vividly portrayed the planters' atrocities to the urban public Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 31, p.575.

In contrast, the Deccan Riots of 1875 were directed not against European planters, but against Sahukars (moneylenders). Under the Ryotwari system, the government’s high land revenue demand forced peasants to borrow heavily. When cotton prices crashed following the end of the American Civil War, peasants found themselves unable to pay. The riots began in Supa (Pune district) where peasants systematically attacked the moneylenders' houses and burned their account books (bahi-khatas) and debt bonds to symbolically and legally erase their debts THEMES IN INDIAN HISTORY PART III, History CLASS XII (NCERT 2025 ed.), COLONIALISM AND THE COUNTRYSIDE, p.255.

Feature	Indigo Revolt (1859-60)	Deccan Riots (1875)
Primary Target	European Planters	Indigenous Moneylenders (Sahukars)
Core Issue	Forced commercial cropping vs. food crops	Indebtedness and high land revenue
Major Outcome	Indigo Commission; decline of indigo in Bengal	Deccan Agriculturists' Relief Act (1879)

Sources: History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 1: Rise of Nationalism in India, p.3; Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 31: Peasant Movements 1857-1947, p.575; THEMES IN INDIAN HISTORY PART III, History CLASS XII (NCERT 2025 ed.), COLONIALISM AND THE COUNTRYSIDE, p.255

3. Tribal Movements and Forest Policies (intermediate)

To understand tribal movements in colonial India, we must first look at the concept of 'Dikus'—a term used by tribes to describe 'outsiders' like moneylenders, traders, and British officials who disrupted their self-sufficient world. Unlike the peasants in the plains who were already integrated into agrarian hierarchies, tribal communities lived in relatively egalitarian structures with communal land ownership. The British intervention turned this world upside down by treating tribal lands as state property and introducing private property concepts that favored outsiders Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Social Science, Class VIII, The Colonial Era in India, p.106.

One of the earliest major sparks was the Kol Uprising (1831–1832) in the Chota Nagpur region. It was a direct reaction to land policies that transferred tribal lands to non-tribal settlers. This set a pattern for future resistance: when traditional rights were ignored, the tribes—including the Mundas and Oraons—resorted to armed struggle to reclaim their autonomy Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Social Science, Class VIII, The Colonial Era in India, p.106.

The Santhal Rebellion (1855–1856), led by the brothers Sidhu and Kanhu Murmu, took this resistance to a massive scale. The Santhals had cleared the forests of the Rajmahal hills (the Damin-i-Koh) to settle as farmers, only to find the British state levying heavy taxes while zamindars and moneylenders trapped them in debt. The rebellion was so fierce that the British were forced to create the Santhal Pargana, a separate administrative unit of 5,500 square miles, to pacify the region and ensure tribal lands weren't easily alienated again THEMES IN INDIAN HISTORY PART III, History CLASS XII, COLONIALISM AND THE COUNTRYSIDE, p.242.

Finally, we see the Munda Ulgulan (Great Tumult) of 1899–1900 led by Birsa Munda. This movement was deeply spiritual and political. Birsa declared himself a divine messenger, aiming to drive out the British and 'Dikus' to establish Munda rule. The core grievance here was the destruction of their traditional common land system (often called Khuntkatti) by jagirdars and revenue farmers History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Early Resistance to British Rule, p.292. These movements prove that tribal resistance wasn't just about money; it was a fight for the preservation of a way of life against an intrusive, commercial state.

Sources: Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Social Science, Class VIII, The Colonial Era in India, p.106; THEMES IN INDIAN HISTORY PART III, History CLASS XII, COLONIALISM AND THE COUNTRYSIDE, p.242; History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Early Resistance to British Rule, p.292

4. Economic Critique of British Rule (intermediate)

To understand why peasants and tribals rose in rebellion, we must first understand the Economic Critique of British rule developed by early nationalists. Before the mid-19th century, many believed British rule was "divine providence" bringing modernity. However, leaders like Dadabhai Naoroji, through his seminal work Poverty and Un-British Rule in India, shifted the narrative by proving that Britain was systematically impoverishing India through a 'Drain of Wealth' History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 1, p.12.

Naoroji argued that unlike previous invaders who either plundered and left or stayed and spent their wealth within India, the British were unique. They acted as an "absentee landlord," extracting taxes and resources to fund English industries, salaries, and wars without providing any equivalent material return to India History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Effects of British Rule, p.275. This created a structural cycle of poverty that hit the rural heartland the hardest.

Feature	Earlier Invaders (Mughals, etc.)	British Colonial Rule
Wealth Circulation	Spent within India; stimulated local trade/artistry.	Drained to Britain via "Home Charges," pensions, and profits.
Revenue Rigidity	Often flexible; remissions granted during crop failure.	Highly rigid; demanded fixed cash payments even during famines.
Economic Goal	Self-sufficiency of the empire.	Transforming India into a supplier of raw materials and a market for finished goods.

This economic exploitation manifested in the commercialization of agriculture. Agriculture stopped being a "way of life" and became a business enterprise forced upon the peasantry Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 31, p.544. Peasants were coerced into growing cash crops like indigo, cotton, and jute for international markets. While this linked India to the global economy, it left farmers vulnerable to market crashes and caused a decline in food grain production, leading to frequent famines.

Furthermore, the colonial state's revenue policy was the primary trigger for mass mobilization. Nationalists pointed out that the British violated their own revenue codes by refusing to grant remissions (tax breaks) during droughts. For example, during the Kheda Satyagraha (1918), the struggle wasn't just about high taxes, but about the government's refusal to waive revenue despite total crop failure Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 31, p.574. Similarly, for tribal communities, the British restricted shifting cultivation (known as jhum or podu), labeling it as "harmful" to forests to ensure they could extract timber for railways, effectively criminalizing the tribal way of life India and the Contemporary World - I, Forest Society and Colonialism, p.86.

Sources: History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 1: Rise of Nationalism in India, p.12; History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Effects of British Rule, p.275; A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 31: Peasant Movements 1857-1947, p.544, 548, 574; India and the Contemporary World - I. History-Class IX. NCERT (Revised ed 2025), Forest Society and Colonialism, p.86

5. Congress and the Rise of Peasant Mobilization (exam-level)

The relationship between the Indian National Congress and the peasantry marked a transformative shift in the Indian national movement, evolving from an elite-led constitutional struggle to a mass-based social revolution. Initially, the Congress's involvement was cautious, but under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi, the party began to champion specific rural grievances. A defining moment was the Kheda Satyagraha (1918), where the primary conflict centered on the British government’s refusal to grant land revenue remission despite widespread crop failure and famine History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 1, p. 10. By mobilizing peasants against the rigid revenue code, the Congress demonstrated that political freedom was meaningless without economic relief for the tiller. During the 1920s, the mobilization became more organized through the formation of Kisan Sabhas (Peasant Associations). In Awadh, leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru and Baba Ramchandra worked to integrate local struggles against bedakhali (eviction) and begar (unpaid forced labour) into the larger Non-Cooperation Movement India and the Contemporary World – II. History-Class X, Nationalism in India, p.35. This era saw the use of social boycotts, such as nai-dhobi bandhs, to isolate oppressive landlords. The goal was to bridge the gap between the urban nationalist leadership and the rural masses, making the peasant cause the very heartbeat of the anti-colonial struggle. By the 1930s, this partnership reached its institutional peak. The Karachi Session (1931), presided over by Sardar Patel, was a landmark event that adopted a resolution on Fundamental Rights and Economic Policy, explicitly linking political independence to the economic emancipation of the peasantry History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 5, p. 67. This radicalization continued with the formation of the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) in 1936. The AIKS agenda significantly shaped the Congress’s agrarian policy for the 1937 provincial elections, proving that the peasant movement had moved from the periphery to the core of the Congress’s political platform Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 31, p. 581.

Sources: History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 1: Rise of Nationalism in India, p.10; India and the Contemporary World – II. History-Class X, Nationalism in India, p.35; History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 5: Period of Radicalism in Anti-imperialist Struggles, p.67; Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 31: Peasant Movements 1857-1947, p.581

6. Specific Grievance: Revenue Remission and the Kheda Satyagraha (exam-level)

In the colonial revenue system, the British government prioritized a fixed and predictable income to fund their administrative and military machinery. However, agriculture in India was (and remains) a 'gamble in the monsoons.' When crops failed due to drought or pests, the rigid demand for land revenue became an instrument of extraction that pushed peasants into the clutches of moneylenders or starvation. The concept of Revenue Remission — the legal waiving of taxes during times of distress — became a flashpoint for nationalist mobilization. Under the colonial Famine Code or Revenue Code, cultivators were technically entitled to a total remission of land revenue if the crop yield fell below 25 percent of the normal average History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 1, p.43.

The Kheda Satyagraha of 1918 serves as the definitive example of this grievance. In the Kheda district of Gujarat, a severe monsoon failure resulted in widespread crop destruction. Despite the legal provision for remission, the authorities remained adamant, refusing to grant relief and instead threatening to seize the property and cattle of defaulting farmers Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 15, p.319. This was not just an economic struggle; it was a fight against the high-handedness of a government that refused to follow its own laws. While Mahatma Gandhi acted as the spiritual and ideological guide, the movement saw the emergence of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, who, along with leaders like Mohanlal Pandya and Ravi Shankar Vyas, organized a disciplined tax revolt across different caste and ethnic communities Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 15, p.319.

The significance of the Kheda struggle lies in how it shifted the peasant movement from mere petitioning to non-violent mass resistance. The Gujarat Sabha, representing the peasants, had initially sent numerous petitions to the highest governing authorities, but these were ignored Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 15, p.318. By advising farmers to withhold revenue despite the threat of confiscation, the Satyagraha taught the peasantry the power of collective 'No.' It highlighted a systemic colonial failure: even when the law recognized the 'doctrine of relief,' the administration often viewed it as an act of charity rather than a right, fearing that granting relief would encourage the poor to demand it at all times Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Class VIII (NCERT 2025), Chapter 4, p.97.

Sources: History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Chapter 1: Rise of Nationalism in India, p.43; Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM., Chapter 15: Emergence of Gandhi, p.318-319; Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Social Science, Class VIII . NCERT(Revised ed 2025), Chapter 4: The Colonial Era in India, p.97

7. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

This question synthesizes the concepts of Economic Nationalism and the Agrarian Crisis under colonial rule. While you have learned that the British land revenue systems—Ryotwari, Mahalwari, and Zamindari—were structurally exploitative, this specific question asks for the trigger behind the organized struggles led by the Congress. The transition from general hardship to a "great struggle" required a clear moral and legal breach by the British. As highlighted in History, class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), the Congress focused on the inflexibility of the revenue system, which demanded fixed payments regardless of the peasants' ability to pay during environmental catastrophes.

To reach the correct answer, (B) No-remission of land revenue during periods of drought and other natural calamities, you must recall specific Satyagrahas like Kheda (1918). In Kheda, the struggle was not merely against the tax itself, but against the government's refusal to grant a waiver despite a total crop failure. A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum) explains that this specific grievance allowed the Congress to mobilize the peasantry by highlighting the "unjust" nature of colonial laws that ignored human survival. This pattern of mobilization was later codified in the Karachi Session (1931), where the Congress officially demanded substantial reductions in rent and revenue alongside exemptions during periods of distress.

UPSC often uses "systemic issues" as distractors for "immediate causes." For instance, (D) Extortionate assessment was a constant reality of colonial rule, but it was a chronic condition rather than the acute trigger for the specific political struggles mentioned. (A) Absence of Permanent Settlement is a trap because the Permanent Settlement was itself often viewed as oppressive due to its creation of the Zamindari class; nationalists were not fighting to expand it. Finally, (C) Indenture system was indeed a nationalist grievance, but it pertained to overseas labor exploitation rather than the domestic peasant-led land revenue struggles engineered by the Congress leadership within India.