The Dahsala or Zabti System was implemented during Akbar's reign in 1580-82 to address issues that arose as a result of fixing prices each year and revenue settlement for the previous year. This system was primarily developed by Raja Todarmal, who was the finance minister during the Mughal Empire in India at the time. In this article, we will discuss the Dahsala System of Mughal Empire of Akbar which will be helpful for UPSC exam preparation.

Raja Todar Mal

Dahsala System - Background

• Raja Todar Mal, as Akbar's finance minister, introduced a new revenue collection system known as the zabti system and the dahsala system, which was a taxation system.
• He conducted a thorough survey of crop yields and prices over a ten-year period using the system.
• The Dahsala system, instituted by Akbar, was used to calculate the average produce of various crops as well as the average prices prevailing over the previous ten years, and the state received one-third of the average produce.
• In fact, historians believe it was the most important method of assessment during the Mughal period. This practise can be traced back to Sher Shah's reign.
• The system was revised several times during Akbar's reign before it took its final form.
• The system was only used in the Empire's major provinces, which included Multan, Delhi, Allahabad, Awadh, Agra, and Lahore.

Dahsala System - Features

• In 1580-82, Akbar instituted the Dahasala or Zabati system of land revenue collection to alleviate the problems caused by yearly price fixing and revenue settlements.
• The average yield of ten years was calculated using this system. One-third of this average produce was fixed in Rupees per Bigha and fixed as a state share (Mal). The remaining two-thirds share was left to the cultivators (Kharaj).
• The state demand in kind was given in maunds, but for the conversion of the state demand from kind to cash, a separate schedule of cash revenue rates for various crops, known as Dastur-i-amal, was established.
• Each revenue circle had its own schedule of dastur-i-amal for various crops.
• As a result, the peasant was required to pay based on both local produce and local prices.
• Raja Todarmal, the capable finance minister of Akbar, who had honed his skills under his first master Shershah Suri, introduced the Dahsala System or Zabti System.
• This system was in place from Lahore to Allahabad, as well as in the provinces of Malwa and Gujarat. Throughout the Mughal empire, this was the standard system of revenue assessment.
• Murshid Quli Khan introduced it to the Deccan during Shahjahan's reign.

Dahsala System - Measurement

• The bigha (60 x 60 yards) was used as the standard unit of area for measuring land. A new gaz or yard, gaz-i-llahi, was defined as 41 digits (anguls) or 33 inches in length.
• Both the regularity and productivity of cultivation were considered when determining land revenue.
• Thus, land that had been continuously cultivated was called polaj, and land that had been lying fallow (parauti) for a year was made to pay full rates (called polaj) to make it cultivable.
• Chachar was land that had been fallow for 3-4 years. This land was taxed at a progressive rate, with the full rate charged in the third year.
• Another category was known as Banjar, or cultivable waste land. To make Banjar cultivable, the land was charged with full rates only after the fifth year of cultivation.

Dahsala System - Conversion

• Furthermore, after assessing land revenue in kind, it was converted to cash using dastur-ul-amal (price schedules).
• Dastur-ul-amal was created at the regional or dastur (circle) level, taking into account food crops.
• To facilitate this administrative function, the empire was divided into a large number of regions known as dastur at the pargana (sub district level), which were clubbed together based on the same type of productivity.
• The administration was in charge of supplying dastur-ul-amal (a schedule of individual crops) at the tehsil level, where the mode of land revenue payment with detailed explanations was charted out.
• Following that, each cultivator was given a patta or title deed (land holding deed) and a qubuliyat (deed of agreement in accordance with which the cultivator had to pay his dues).

Dahsala System - Merits

• Because permanent or fixed dastur systems were in place, there was no room for fluctuation or uncertainty in the levying of land revenue.
• The measurement is easily rechecked or re-ascertained.
• Because of the fixed dasturs, the local officers had no discretion or power to abuse their positions, and corruption was reduced to a bare minimum.

Dahsala System - Limitations

• Most of the time, farmers did not have the strength to bear the Zabti, and as a result, local officials took one-third of the crops as revenue.
• If the crops did not produce a sufficient yield, the farmers were at a loss because they were on the receiving end of the loss or risk.
• There were instances where agricultural land was fraudulently recorded by local officers, and the local authority thus abused the system.
• This method was quite expensive because a cess called zabitana or one dam per bigha was spared in order to bear the entire cost of party measurement maintenance.
• Raja Todermal's Dahsala or Zabti System did, in fact, simplify the revenue system.
• Peasants were paid based on local prices and produce, and there was no ten-year or permanent land settlement system in place.
• The system was implemented in the Mughal Empire's major provinces of Agra, Awadh, Delhi, and Multan.

Conclusion

The Dahsala system ensured that everyone involved in and affected by the system benefited. A new system was created to make keeping track of income and expenses easier. Because the system had been in place for a long time, the government was able to perfect it by overcoming the problems. The Dahsala system ensured that there were no fluctuations or uncertainties in the amount to be paid to the government, allowing farmers to know exactly how much they should pay. These farmers were also shielded from officers who would usually take advantage of them by charging arbitrary amounts from different farmers with no explanation. Furthermore, the amount to be paid could be easily measured and rechecked.