Mohan v/s Mohan Mamlatdar Mohanlal Shah

Mohan v/s Mohan

Mamlatdar (Tehsildar) Mohanlal Shah for or against Social Justice?

When we joined the service in the mid-1980s, there was a popular proverb about revenue administration:

“કલેક્ટર કકળાટ કરે, મામલતદાર મૂંઝાય, સર્કલ બિચારો શું કરે, તલાટી કરે તે થાય.”

The Collector clamours, the Mamlatdar is confused, what can the Circle Officer do, and ultimately, whatever the Talati (Patwari) does, gets done.

Over the past 35 years, the mode of governance has changed. The regulatory mechanism has gradually given way to developmental and people-friendly administration. Who clamours, who gets confused and who ultimately decides—the players have changed. But under British rule, the Mamlatdar and the Collector were powerful and authoritative functionaries of the colonial administration.

The Bardoli Satyagraha of 1928, against the enhancement of land revenue, was led successfully by Vallabhbhai Patel. Gandhi kept himself away from the actual leadership of the movement. The women of Bardoli bestowed upon Vallabhbhai Patel the title “Sardar.” The Satyagraha transformed him into an important national leader. It followed the pattern established by the Kheda Satyagraha of 1918, led by Gandhi.

At the national level, Jawaharlal Nehru succeeded his father, Motilal Nehru, as President of the Indian National Congress in 1929. The Purna Swaraj resolution was adopted at the Lahore session of the Congress in December 1929, and 26 January 1930 was declared to be observed as Independence Day. This was followed by Gandhi’s famous 241-mile (approximately 384-km) Salt March, from Sabarmati Ashram to Dandi, from 12 March to 6 April 1930. Gandhi’s act of breaking the salt law became the spark that brought millions of Indians into the Civil Disobedience Movement. The movement eventually led to the Gandhi-Irwin Pact, the Round Table Conferences, and, in the longer constitutional process, the Government of India Act, 1935, followed ultimately by self-government and independence.

The farmers of Kheda were facing severe agrarian distress, including successive years of poor rainfall. Farmers demanded remission of land revenue. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel advised peasants in Matar and Mehmedabad talukas to refuse payment of revenue. Faced with the agitation, the administration postponed revenue recovery. Vallabhbhai wished to launch a no-tax campaign similar to the Bardoli Satyagraha. Gandhi, however, was concerned about the possibility of violence and the consequences of government action, including confiscation of land, cattle and other property. He therefore looked for an alternative form of agitation that could involve ordinary people without putting their land and livelihood at comparable risk. The answer was to break the salt law.

Vallabhbhai Patel reportedly considered the salt issue a relatively weak basis for agitation and was not initially convinced by Gandhi’s strategy. Nevertheless, Gandhi entrusted him with determining the route of the Salt March. Vallabhbhai subsequently passed the responsibility to Ravishankar Maharaj and Mohanlal Pandya, who suggested Dandi as the destination.

After Gandhi announced his intention to break the salt law, the Kheda administration prepared a list of persons to be detained, including Sardar Patel. The Collector of Kheda, Alfred Master, also imposed restrictions on public meetings and speeches. While Vallabhbhai Patel was addressing a gathering at Ras, he was served a notice by the First Class Magistrate of Borsad. He was arrested by the police and brought before Collector Alfred Master. After a hearing lasting about 90 minutes, Patel was sentenced on 7 March 1930 to three months’ imprisonment and a fine of ₹500, with an additional three weeks’ imprisonment in lieu of the fine. He was sent to Sabarmati Jail. At the prison gate, Superintendent Bilimoria offered him a cigarette. Knowing the prison regulations, Patel refused it and, according to the well-known account, gave up smoking thereafter. Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya objected to Patel’s punishment and raised the issue of freedom of speech in the Central Legislative Assembly.

Sardar Patel remained in Sabarmati Jail from 7 March to 26 June 1930. By the time he was released, the country was in the midst of the Civil Disobedience Movement triggered by Gandhi’s Salt March. Jawaharlal Nehru and his father, Motilal Nehru, had also been arrested, and Patel therefore played an important organisational role in the Congress. Gandhi was arrested on 4 May 1930, further increasing Patel’s importance in the leadership of the movement. Patel was arrested again on 31 July 1930 in Bombay and was subsequently imprisoned in Yerwada Jail, where Gandhi and later Jawaharlal Nehru were also held.

The village of Ras in Borsad taluka became a major centre of the agitation. When Gandhi’s Salt March reached Ras on 19 March 1930, peasants from Ras and 13 other villages resolved to refuse payment of land revenue despite the threat of losing their land and property. Borsad taluka began its no-tax agitation on 10 May, and it received further support from Kheda peasants at a conference held at Kheda on 31 May.

Collector Alfred Master and his Mamlatdar, Mohanlal Shah, were active in suppressing the agitation. One Mohan—Mohan Gandhi—was leading the movement, while another Mohan—Mamlatdar Mohanlal Shah—was administering the machinery to suppress it.

According to contemporary accounts, Mamlatdar Shah moved with police forces, used coercive measures against peasants and supervised the confiscation of property and ornaments. Temporary detention centres were established, and local leaders were arrested. The repression created considerable fear among the villagers. By February, many families had migrated towards Vadodara, where some stayed in makeshift refugee camps constructed from leaves and tree branches. Lands were confiscated, and officials who resigned from government service were dismissed.

The Collector and the Mamlatdar subsequently announced the sale of agricultural land confiscated from Patidars and sought to offer it to the Baraiya and Patanvadia Koli communities of the taluka. On 20 September, Mamlatdar Shah reportedly told the Kolis of Asodar that he had come to return land to them at the rate of ₹10 for ten bighas—land which, according to the official narrative, had been taken from them by Patidars during the severe famine of 1899–1900. He promised them police protection.

In December, he reportedly offered them land, houses and the position of Mukhi, presenting himself as the protector of the Baraiya and Patanvadia communities. According to accounts of the period, this policy contributed to incidents of crop theft and the burning of Patidar houses in 17 villages.

But the policy of divide and rule did not work for long. Shah tried to convince the Baraiyas that they were the original rulers and owners of the land. Congress leader Bhavanji Parmar, however, called a meeting of Baraiyas from 17 villages, where a resolution was adopted that any Baraiya who purchased Patidar land would face social boycott. Consequently, except for a few individuals, the Baraiyas did not come forward to purchase the confiscated land.

All 51 villages of Borsad taluka joined the no-tax movement and did not surrender to the Collector’s and Mamlatdar’s strategy of division. Nevertheless, through coercive recovery measures, the administration succeeded in collecting a substantial portion—reported at around 40 per cent—of the land revenue from the taluka.

When Revenue Minister Frank Hudson visited Borsad in December 1930, refugees from Ras and Bochasan met him and complained about the atrocities allegedly committed by the Mamlatdar. Subsequently, Mamlatdar Mohanlal Shah was transferred and Solomon Benjamin was appointed Mamlatdar of Borsad. Collector Alfred Master was replaced by Perry in 1931.

The Gandhi-Irwin Pact brought a temporary compromise, and political prisoners were released. However, the Bombay Government initially resisted the return of confiscated and sold lands of the Patidars. The compromise also could not save Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru from execution. Gandhi described the pact as opening the door to self-rule.

In 1931, Sardar Patel succeeded Jawaharlal Nehru as President of the Indian National Congress. His elder brother, Vithalbhai Patel, who had resigned as President of the Central Legislative Assembly during the Civil Disobedience Movement, was reportedly unhappy because he had expected the Congress presidency himself. Eventually, through Sardar Patel’s efforts, all but 72 acres of the 1,792 acres of confiscated land in Borsad taluka was returned to the peasants by 30 April 1931.

Mamlatdar Mohanlal Shah, functioning under the authority of Kheda Collector Alfred Master, challenged the public and political authority of Sardar Patel in 1930. In the name of social justice, the administration attempted to distribute confiscated Patidar land among Baraiya and Patanvadia Kolis. Shah was not confused; he was clear about his role and his duty to the colonial authority he served.

Times have changed since Independence. The coercive authority of the Mamlatdar has diminished, but the importance of revenue administration has continued. That perhaps explains why, even after 35 years of service in the IAS, during which one may serve as Collector for only two to five years, many officers still retain a special fascination for the post of Collector. It is, in many ways, a lasting legacy of the power and prestige attached to the office during British rule.

Punamchand
25 December 2019