Flagship programmes – a new thrust during the 12th Plan

Flagship programmes – a new thrust during the 12th Plan One area that attracts due attention during the 12th Plan period is more effective implementation of f lagship programmes. The 12th Plan document of the GoI highlights that there is a proliferation of centrally sponsored schemes over a period which led to poor implementation, duplication, lack of convergence and sub-optimal results and stressed the urgency of transforming the system and considerably reduce the number of schemes. The Central Government plans to restructure the Centrally Sponsored Schemes in the light of the recommendations of Dr. Chaturvedi Committee where the State will have flexibility to utilise 20% of these funds to formulate schemes suiting State specific requirements

INDIAN HISTORY (INDIA'S STRUGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE: BIPIN CHANDRA ) :CHAPTER 1. THE FIRST MAJOR CHALLENGE: THE REVOLT OF 1857

CHAPTER 2. CIVIL REBELLIONS AND
TRIBAL UPRISINGS
The Revolt of 1857 was the most dramatic instance of traditional
India’s struggle against foreign rule. But it was no sudden
occurrence. It was the culmination of a century long tradition of
fierce popular resistance to British domination.
The establishment of British power in India was a prolonged
process of piecemeal conquest and consolidation and the
colonialization of the economy and society. This process produced
discontent, resentment and resistance at every stage. This
popular resistance took three broad forms: civil rebellions, tribal
uprisings and peasant movements. We will discuss the first two
in this chapter.
*
The series of civil rebellions, which run like a thread
through the first 100 years of British rule, were often led by
deposed rajas and nawabs or their descendants, uprooted and
impoverished zamindars, landlords and poligars (landed military
magnates in South India), and ex-retainers and officials of the
conquered Indian states. The backbone of the rebellions, their
mass base and striking power came from the rack-rented
peasants, ruined artisans and demobilized soldiers.
These sudden, localized revolts often took place because of
local grievances although for short periods they acquired a broad
sweep, involving armed bands of a few hundreds to several
thousands. The major cause of all these civil rebellions taken as a
whole was the rapid changes the British introduced in the
economy, administration and land revenue system. These
changes led to the disruption of the agrarian society, causing
prolonged and widespread suffering among its constituents Above
all, the colonial policy of intensifying demands for land revenueand extracting as large an amount as possible produced a
veritable upheaval in Indian villages. In Bengal, for example, in
less than thirty years land revenue collection was raised to nearly
double the amount collected under the Mughals. The pattern was
repeated in other us of the country as British rule spread. And
aggravating the unhappiness of the farmers was the fact that not
even a part of the enhanced revenue was spent on the
development of agriculture or the welfare of the cultivator.
Thousands of zamindars and poligars lost control over their
land and its revenues either due to the extinction of their rights
by the colonial state or by the forced sale of their rights over land
because of their inability to meet the exorbitant land revenue
demanded. The proud zamindars and poligars resented this loss
even more when they were displaced by rank outsiders —
government officials and the new men of money — merchants
and moneylenders. Thus they, as also the old chiefs, who had
lost their principalities, had personal scores to settle with the
new rulers.
Peasants and artisans, as we have seen earlier, had their
own reasons to rise up in arms and side with the traditional elite.
Increasing demands for land revenue were forcing large numbers
of peasants into growing indebtedness or into selling their lands.
The new landlords, bereft of any traditional paternalism towards
their tenants, pushed up rents to ruinous heights and evicted
them in the case of non-payment. The economic decline of the
peasantry was reflected in twelve major and numerous minor
famines from 1770 to 1857.
The new courts and legal system gave a further fillip to the
dispossessors of land and encouraged the rich to oppress the
poor. Flogging, torture and jailing of the cultivators for arrears of
rent or land revenue or interest on debt were quite common. The
ordinary people were also hard hit by the prevalence of
corruption at the lower levels of the police, judiciary and general
administration. The petty officials enriched themselves freely at
the cost of the poor. The police looted, oppressed and tortured
the common people at will. William Edwards, a British official,
wrote in 1859 that the police were ‘a scourge to the people’ andthat ‘their oppression and exactions form one of the chief
grounds of dissatisfaction with our government.’
The ruin of Indian handicraft industries, as a result of the
imposition of free trade in India and levy of discriminatory tariffs
against Indian goods in Britain, pauperized millions of artisans.
The misery of the artisans was further compounded by the
disappearance of their traditional patrons and buyers, the
princes, chieftains, and zamindars.
The scholarly and priestly classes were also active in
inciting hatred and rebellion against foreign rule. The traditional
rulers and ruling elite had financially supported scholars,
religious preachers, priests, pandits and maulvis and men of arts
and literature. With the coming of the British and the ruin of the
traditional landed and bureaucratic elite, this patronage came to
an end, and all those who had depended on it were impoverished.
Another major cause of the rebellions was the very foreign
character of British rule. Like any other people, the Indian people
too felt humiliated at being under a foreigner’s heel. This feeling
of hurt pride inspired efforts to expel the foreigner from their
lands.
The civil rebellions began as British rule was established in
Bengal and Bihar, arid they occurred in area after area as it was
incorporated into colonial rule. There was hardly a year without
armed opposition or a decade without a major armed rebellion in
one part of the country or the other. From 1763 to 1856, there
were more than forty major rebellions apart from hundreds of
minor ones.
Displaced peasants and demobilized soldiers of Bengal led
by religious monks and dispossessed zamindars were the first to
rise up in the Sanyasi rebellion, made famous by Bankim
Chandra Chatterjee in his novel Anand Math, that lasted from
1763 to 1800. It was followed by the Chuar uprising which
covered five districts of Bengal and Bihar from 1766 to 1772 and
then, again, from 1795 to 1816. Other major rebellions in
Eastern India were those of Rangpur and Dinajpur, 1783;
Bishnupur and Birbhum, 1799; Orissa zamindars, 1804-17; and
Sambalpur, 1827-40.





(UPTO PAGE NO. 14)

INDIAN HISTORY (INDIA'S STRUGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE: BIPIN CHANDRA ) :CHAPTER 1. THE FIRST MAJOR CHALLENGE: THE REVOLT OF 1857

CHAPTER 1. THE FIRST MAJOR
CHALLENGE: THE
REVOLT OF 1857
It was the morning of 11 May 1857. The city of De1h had
not yet woken up when a band of Sepoys from Meerut, who had
defied and killed the European officers the previous day, crossed
the Jamuna, set the toll house on fire and marched to the Red
Fort. They entered the Red Fort through the Raj Ghat gate,
followed by an excited crowd, to appeal to Bahadur Shah II, the
Moghul Emperor— a pensioner of the British East India
Company, who possessed nothing but the name of the mighty
Mughals — to become their leader, thus, give legitimacy to their
cause. Bahadur Shah vacillated as he was neither sure of the
intentions of the sepoys nor of his own ability to play an effective
role. He was however persuaded, if not coerced, to give in and
was proclaimed the Shahenshah-e-Hindustan. The sepoys, then,
set out to capture and control the imperial city of Delhi. Simon
Fraser, the Political Agent and several other Englishmen were
killed; the public offices were either occupied or destroyed. The
Revolt of an unsuccessful but heroic effort to eliminate foreign
rule, had begun. The capture of Delhi and the proclamation of
Bahadur Shah as the Emperor of Hindustan gave a positive
political meaning to the revolt and provided a rallying point for
the rebels by recalling the past glory of the imperial city.
The Revolt at Meerut and the capture of Delhi was the
precursor to a widespread mutiny by the sepoys and rebellion
almost all over North India, as well as Central and Western India.
South India remained quiet and Punjab and Bengal were only
marginally affected. Almost half the Company’s sepoy strength of
2,32,224 opted out of their loyalty to their regimental colors and
overcame the ideology of the army, meticulously constructed over
a period of time through training and discipline.
Even before the Meerut incident, there were rumblings of
resentment in various cantonments. The 19th Native Infantry at
2 | India’s Struggle for Independence
Berhampur which refused to use the newly introduced Enfield
Rifle, was disbanded in March 1857. A young sepoy of the 34th
Native Infantry, Mangal Pande, went a step further and fired at
the Sergeant Major of his regiment. He was overpowered and
executed and his regiment too, was disbanded. The 7th Oudh
regiment which defied its officers met with a similar fate.
Within a month of capture of Delhi, the Revolt spread to
different parts of the country: Kanpur, Lucknow, Benares,
Allahabad, Bareilly, Jagdishpur and Jhansi. The rebel activity
was marked by intense anti-British feelings and the
administration was invariably toppled. In the absence of any
leaders from their own ranks, the insurgents turned to the
traditional leaders of Indian society — the territorial aristocrats
and feudal chiefs who had suffered at the hands of the British.
At Kanpur, the natural choice was Nana Saheb, the adopted
son of the last Peshwa,Baji Rao II. He had refused the family title
and, banished from Poona, was living near Kanpur. Begum
Hazrat Mahal took over the reigns where popular sympathy was
overwhelmingly in favour of the deposed Nawab. Her son, Birjis
Qadir, was proclaimed the Nawab and a regular administration
was organized with important offices shared equally by Muslims
and Hindus.
At Barielly, Khan Bahadur, a descendant of the former ruler
of Rohilkhand was placed in command. Living on a pension
granted by the British, he was not too enthusiastic about this
and had in fact, warned the Commissioner of the impending
mutiny. Yet, once the Revolt broke out, he assumed the
administration, organized an army of 40,000 soldiers and offered
stiff resistance to the British.
*
In Bihar the Revolt was led by Kunwar Singh, the zamindar
of Jagdishpur,a 70 year-old man on the brink of bankruptcy. He
nursed a grudge against the British. He had been deprived of his
estates by them and his repeated appeals to be entrusted with
their management again fell on deaf ears. Even though he had
not planned an uprising, he unhesitatingly joined the sepoys
when they reached Arrah from Dinapore.
3 | The First Major Challenge: The Revolt of 1857
The most outstanding leader of the Revolt was Rani
Lakshmibai, who assumed the leadership of the sepoys at
Jhansi. Lord Dalhousie, the Governor-General, had refused to
allow her adopted son to succeed to the throne after her husband
died and had annexed the state by the application of the Doctrine
of Lapse. The Rani had tried everything to reverse the decision.
She even offered to keep Jhansi ‘safe’ for the British if they would
grant her wishes. When it was clear nothing was working she
joined the sepoys and, in time, became one of the most
formidable enemies the British had to contend with.
The Revolt was not confined to these major centres. It had
embraced almost every cantonment in the Bengal and a few in
Bombay. Only the Madras army remained totally loyal. Why did
the sepoys revolt? It was considered prestigious to be in the
service of the Company; it provided economic stability. Why,
then, did the sepoys choose to forego these advantages for the
sake of an uncertain future? A proclamation issued at Delhi
indicates the immediate cause: ‘it is well known that in these
days all the English have entertained these evil designs — first, to
destroy the religion of the whole Hindustani Army, and then to
make the people by compulsion Christians. Therefore, we, solely
on account of our religion, have combined with the people, and
have not spared alive one infidel, and have re-established the
Delhi dynasty on these terms’.
It is certainly true that the conditions of service in the
Company’s army and cantonments increasingly came into
conflict with the religious beliefs and prejudices of the sepoys,
who were predominantly drawn from the upper caste Hindus of
the North Western Provinces and Oudh. Initially, the
administration sought to accommodate the sepoys’ demands:
facilities were provided to them to live according to the dictates of
their caste and religion. But, with the extension of the Army’s
operation not only to various parts of India, but also to countries
outside, it was not possible to do so any more. Moreover, caste
distinctions and segregation within a regiment were not
conducive to the cohesiveness of a fighting unit. To begin with,
the administration thought of an easy way out: discourage the
recruitment of Brahmins; this apparently did not succeed and, by
4 | India’s Struggle for Independence
the middle of the nineteenth century, the upper castes
predominated in the Bengal Army, for instance.
The unhappiness of the sepoys first surfaced in 1824 when
the 47th Regiment at Barrackpur was ordered to go to Burma. To
the religious Hindu, crossing the sea meant loss of caste. The
sepoys, therefore, refused to comply. The regiment was disbanded
and those who led the opposition were hanged. The religious
sensibilities of the sepoys who participated in the Afghan War
were more seriously affected. During the arduous and disastrous
campaigns, the fleeing sepoys were forced to eat and drink
whatever came their way. When they returned to India, those at
home correctly sensed that they could not have observed caste
stipulations and therefore, were hesitant to welcome them back
into the biradiri (caste fraternity). Sitaram who had gone to
Afghanistan found himself outcaste not only in his village, but
even in his own barracks. The Prestige of being in the pay of the
Company was not enough to hold his Position in society; religion
and caste proved to be more powerful.
*
The rumours about the Government’s secret designs to
promote conversions to Christianity further exasperated the
sepoys. The official-missionary nexus gave credence to the
rumour. In some cantonments missionaries were permitted to
preach openly and their diatribe against other religions angered
the sepoys. The reports about the mixing of bone dust in atta and
the introduction of the Enfield rifle enhanced the sepoys’ growing
disaffection with the Government. The cartridges of the new rifle
had to be bitten off before loading and the grease was reportedly
made of beef and pig fat. The army administration did nothing to
allay these fears, and the sepoys felt their religion was in real
danger.
The sepoys’ discontent was not limited to religion alone.
They were equally unhappy with their emoluments. A sepoy in
the infantry got seven rupees a month. A sawar in the cavalry
was paid Rs. 27, out of which he had to pay for his own uniform,
food and the upkeep of his mount, and he was ultimately left
with only a rupee or two. What was more galling was the sense of
deprivation compared to his British counterparts. He was made
5 | The First Major Challenge: The Revolt of 1857
to feel a subordinate at every step and was discriminated against
racially and in matters of promotion and privileges. ‘Though he
might give the signs of a military genius of Hyder,’ wrote T.R.
Holmes, ‘he knew that he could never attain the pay of an
English subaltern and that the rank to which he might attain,
after 30 years of faithful service, would not protect him from the
insolent dictation of an ensign fresh from England.” The
discontent of the sepoys was not limited to matters military; they
felt the general disenchantment with and opposition to British
rule. The sepoy, in fact, was a peasant in uniform,’ whose
consciousness was not divorced from that of the rural population.
A military officer had warned Dalhousie about the possible
consequences of his policies: ‘Your army is derived from the
peasantry of the country who have rights and if those rights are
infringed upon, you will no longer have to depend on the fidelity
of the army . . . If you infringe the institutions of the people of
India, that army will sympathize with them; for they are part of
the population, and in every infringement you may make upon
the rights of the individuals, you infringe upon the rights of men
who are either themselves in the army or upon their sons, their
fathers or their relations.’
*
Almost every agricultural family in Oudh had a
representative in the army; there were 75,000 men from Oudh.
Whatever happened there was of immediate concern to the sepoy.
The new land revenue system introduced after the annexation
and the confiscation of lands attached to charitable institutions
affected his well-being. That accounted for the 14,000 petitions
received from the sepoys about the hardships of the revenue
system. A proclamation issued by the Delhi rebels clearly
reflected the sepoy’s awareness of the misery brought about by
British rule. The mutiny in itself, therefore, was a revolt against
the British and, thus, a political act. What imparted this
character to the mutiny was the sepoy’s identity of interests with
the general population.
The Revolt of the sepoys was accompanied by a rebellion of
the civil population, particularly in the North Western Provinces
6 | India’s Struggle for Independence
and Oudh, the two areas from which the sepoys of the Bengal
army were recruited. Except in Muzzafarnagar and Saharanpur,
civil rebellion followed the Revolt of the sepoys. The action of the
sepoys released the rural population from fear of the state and
the control exercised by the administration. Their accumulated
grievances found immediate expression and they rose en masse
to give vent to their opposition to British rule. Government
buildings were destroyed, the “treasury was plundered, the
magazine was sacked, barracks and court houses were burnt and
prison gates were flung open.” The civil rebellion had a broad
social base, embracing all sections of society — the territorial
magnates, peasants, artisans, religious mendicants and priests,
civil servants, shopkeepers and boatmen. The Revolt of the
sepoys, thus, resulted in a popular uprising.
*
The reason for this mass upsurge has to be sought in the
nature of British rule which adversely affected the interests of
almost all sections of society Under the burden of excessive taxes
the peasantry became progressively indebted and impoverished.
The only interest of the Company was the realization of maximum
revenue with minimum effort.
Consequently settlements were hurriedly undertaken, often
without any regard for the resources of the land. For instance, in
the district of Bareilly in 1812, the settlement was completed in
the record time often months with a dramatic increase of Rs.
14.73,188 over the earlier settlement. Delighted by this increase,
the Government congratulated the officers for their ‘zeal, ability
and indefatigable labour.’ It did not occur to the authorities that
such a sharp and sudden increase would have disastrous
consequences on the cultivators. Naturally, the revenue could not
be collected without coercion and torture: in Rohilkhand there
were as many as 2,37,388 coercive collections during 1848-56.
Whatever the conditions, the Government was keen on collecting
revenue. Even in very adverse circumstances, remissions were
rarely granted. A collector, who repeatedly reported his inability
to realize revenue from an estate, as only grass was grown there,
was told that grass was a very good produce and it should be sold
for collecting revenue!
7 | The First Major Challenge: The Revolt of 1857
The traditional landed aristocracy suffered no less. In Oudh,
which was a storm centre of the Revolt, the taluqdars lost all
their power and privileges. About 21,000 taluqdars whose estates
were confiscated suddenly found themselves without a source of
income, ‘unable to work, ashamed to beg, condemned to penury.’
These dispossessed taluqdars smarting under the humiliation
heaped on them, seized the opportunity presented by the Sepoy
Revolt to oppose the British and regain what they had lost.
*
British rule also meant misery to the artisans and
handicraftsmen. The annexation of Indian states by the Company
cut off their major source of patronage. Added to this, British
policy discouraged Indian handicrafts and promoted British
goods. The highly skilled Indian craftsmen were deprived of their
source of income and were forced to look for alternate sources of
employment that hardly existed, as the destruction of Indian
handicrafts was not accompanied by the development of modem
industries.
The reforming zeal of British officials under the influence of
utilitarianism had aroused considerable suspicion, resentment,
and opposition. The orthodox Hindus and Muslims feared that
through social legislation the British were trying to destroy their
religion and culture. Moreover, they believed that legislation was
undertaken to aid the missionaries in their quest for
evangelization. The orthodox and the religious, therefore, arrayed
against the British. Several proclamations of the rebels expressed
this cultural concern in no uncertain terms.
The coalition of the Revolt of the sepoys and that of the civil
population made the 1857 movement an unprecedented popular
upsurge. Was it an organized and methodically planned Revolt or
a spontaneous insurrection? In the absence of any reliable
account left behind by the rebels it is difficult to be certain. The
attitude and activities of the leaders hardly suggest any planning
or conspiracy on their part and if at all it existed it was at an
embryonic stage.
8 | India’s Struggle for Independence
When the sepoys arrived from Meerut, Bahadur Shah seems
to have been taken by surprise and promptly conveyed the news
to the Lt.Governor at Agra. So did Rani Lakshmibhai of Jhansi
who took quite some time before openly joining the rebels.
Whether Nana Saheb and Maulvi Ahmad Shah of Faizabad had
established links with various cantonments and were
instrumental in instigating Revolt is yet to be proved beyond
doubt. Similarly, the message conveyed by the circulation of
chappatis and lotus flowers is also uncertain. The only positive
factor is that within a month of the Meerut incident the Revolt
became quite widespread.
*
Even if there was no planning and organization before the
revolt, it was important that it was done, once it started.
Immediately after the capture of Delhi a letter was addressed to
the rulers of all the neighboring states and of Rajasthan soliciting
their support and inviting them to participate. In Delhi, a court of
administrators was established which was responsible for all
matters of state. The court consisted of ten members, six from
the army and four from the civilian departments. All decisions
were taken by a majority vote. The court conducted the affairs of
the state in the name of the Emperor. ‘The Government at Delhi,’
wrote a British official, ‘seems to have been a sort of
constitutional Milocracy. The king was king and honoured as
such, like a constitutional monarch; but instead of a Parliament,
he had a council of soldiers, in whom power rested, and of whom
he was no degree a military commander.’ In other centres, also
attempts were made to bring about an organization.
Bahadur Shah was recognized as the Emperor by all rebel
leaders Coins were struck and orders were issued in his name. At
Bareilly, Khan Bahadur Khan conducted the administration in
the name of the Mughal Emperor. It is also significant that the
first impulse of the rebels was always to proceed to Delhi whether
they were at Meerut, Kanpur or Jhansi. The need to create an
organization and a political institution to preserve the gains was
certainly felt. But in the face of the British counter-offensive,
there was no chance to build on these early nebulous ideas.
9 | The First Major Challenge: The Revolt of 1857
For more than a year, the rebels carried on their struggle
against heavy odds. They had no source of arms and
ammunition; what they had captured from the British arsenals
could not carry them far. They ‘were often forced to fight with
swords and pikes against an enemy supplied with the most
modern weapons. They had no quick system of communication at
their command and, hence, no coordination was possible.
Consequently, they were unaware of the strength and
weaknesses of their compatriots and as a result could not come
to each other’s rescue in times of distress. Every one was left to
play a lonely hand.
*
Although the rebels received the sympathy of the people, the
country as a whole was not behind them. The merchants,
intelligentsia and Indian rulers not only kept aloof, but actively
supported the British. Meetings were organized in Calcutta and
Bombay by them to pray for the success of the British. Despite
the Doctrine of Lapse, the Indian rulers who expected their future
to be safer with the British liberally provided them with men and
materials. Indeed, the sepoys might have made a better fight of it
if they had received their support.
Almost half the Indian soldiers not only did not Revolt but
fought against their own countrymen. The recapture of Delhi was
effected by five columns consisting of 1700 British troops and
3200 Indians. The blowing up of Kashmere Gate was conducted
by six British officers and NCOs and twenty-four Indians, of
whom ten were Punjabis and fourteen were from Agra and Oudh.
Apart from some honourable exceptions like the Rani of
Thansi, Kunwar Singh and Maulvi Ahmadullah, the rebels were
poorly served by their leaders. Most of them failed to realize the
significance of the Revolt and simply did not do enough. Bahadur
Shah and Zeenat Mahal had no faith in the sepoys and
negotiated with the British to secure their safety. Most of the
taluqdars tried only to protect their own interests. Some of them,
10 | India’s Struggle for Independence
like Man Singh, changed sides several times depending on which
side had the upper hand.
Apart from a commonly shared hatred for alien rule, the
rebels had no political perspective or a definite vision of the
future. They were all prisoners of their own past, fighting
primarily to regain their lost privileges. Unsurprisingly, they
proved incapable of ushering in a new political order. John
Lawrence rightly remarked that had a single leader of ability
arisen among them (the rebels) we must have been lost beyond
redemption.’
That was not to be, yet the rebels showed exemplary
courage, dedication and commitment. Thousands of men courted
death, fighting for a cause they held dear. Their heroism alone,
however, could not stem the onslaught of a much superior
British army. The first to fall was Delhi on 20 September 1857
after a prolonged battle. Bahadur Shah, who took refuge in
Humayun’s tomb, was captured, tried and deported to Burma.
With that the back of the Revolt was broken, since Delhi was the
only possible rallying point. The British military then dealt with
the rebels in one centre after another. The Rani of Jhansi died
fighting on 17 June 1858. General Hugh Rose, who defeated her,
paid high tribute to his enemy when he said that ‘here lay the
woman who was the only man among the rebels.’ Nana Saheb
refused to give in and finally escaped to Nepal in the beginning of
1859, hoping to renew the struggle. Kunwar Singh, despite his
old age, was too quick for the British troops and constantly kept
them guessing till his death on 9 May 1858. Tantia Tope, who
successfully carried on guerrilla warfare against the British until
April 1859, was betrayed by a zamindar, captured and put to
‘death by the British.
Thus, came to an end the most formidable challenge the
British Empire had to face in India. It is a matter of speculation
as to what the course of history would have been had the rebels
succeeded. Whether they would have put the clock back’ and
resurrected and reinforced a feudal order need not detain us
here; although that was not necessarily the only option. Despite
the sepoys’ limitations and weaknesses, their effort to emancipate
the country from foreign rule was a patriotic act and a
Progressive step. If the importance of a historical event is not
11 | The First Major Challenge: The Revolt of 1857
limited to its immediate achievements the Revolt of 1857 was not
a pure historical tragedy. Even in failure it served a grand
purpose: a source of inspiration for the national liberation
movement which later achieved what the Revolt could not.