Settlement report of the Ambala district, 1893

· 1893 · Public domain (published pre-1930) · archive.org ↗

113

2the Financial Commissioner (No. 344, dated 15th March 1886) again raised the

3scale so as to give a minimum pay of Rs. 9 to 20 per cent, of the men, Rs. 11

4to 50 per cent., and Rs. 13 to the remaining 30 per cent. This scale is still in

5force. It involved a considerable excess over the receipts from the Patwari cess

6at the old rate of 3-g per cent., the deficit being met up to the introduction of

7new assessments by payment from the settlement annual grant for unsanctioned

8establishment. Altogether in this way the settlement contributed Rs. 20,089

9to the pay of patwaris. On the introduction of now assessments the cess was

10raised to Rs. 4-11-0 per cent, in all four tahsils of North Amballa, the same

11rate being taken by Mr. Douie in Jagadhri and Rs. 5-6-8 in Pipli. The

12Patwari Fund as handed over by me at the end of the settlement had a

13considerable balance at credit, and I think that with a cess at the sanctioned

14rates it will continue solvent, though with not very much to spare. It

15will not perhaps be out of place here to remind officers who have to work

16with the new records that the process of getting together a patwari establish¬

17ment which could do the work at all presented much difficulty. The

18standard of education in the district was very low. The supply of men with

19even the minimum qualifications was barely up to the demand, though the

20schools were literally drained of every eligible school boy. Accuracy of work

21was regarded as tlie first essential, and if we could get that we bad to be

22content with such moderate standard of neatness as the means at disposal

23enabled us to secure.

2430. At the beginning of the settlement there was one kanungo and one

25Kanungos and other Re- naib-kanuugo in each tahsil. These men were with two ex-

26veuuo officials. ceptions so utterly inefficient that sooner or later six of them

27had to resign or be dismissed. The District kanungo also had to go towards the

28close of 1883, the cause in liis case being not so much inefficiency as misconduct

29of a kind that could not be passed over. I filled his place with u Settlement

30Deputy Superintendent named Kirpa Ram, who worked well all through t he settle¬

31ment and still holds the post. On the introduction of the now kaniingos scheme

32for the Punjab in 1885, a staff of three Field and one Office kanungo was sanc¬

33tioned for each tahsil together with an Assistant to the District kamingo. I filled

34eight of these posts with men who had done good work as patwaris and the rest

35with settlement subordinates. They were all passed and certificated before the

36settlement ended, and they are all still in office and I am told doing well. There

37are several men among the patwaris of the district quite competent to qualify

38as kaniingos should vacancies occur, and there ought now to be little difficulty in

39keeping up an efficient staff. Several other officials from the settlement have

40been appointed to subordinate posts on the Revenue establishment of Amballa,

41and it will be some advantage to keep these men if possible in the district

42as they have an intimate knowledge of all that was done in the settlement,

43and are well acquainted with the system under which the new records were

44prepared.

4531. As this section of the report has been mainly confined to the opera*

46Cost of the settlement. tions .of the North-Amballa Settlement this is a convenient

47place to sum up the financial results of the settlement. As stated in para. 16

48the settlement began in February 1883, but the establishment as usual came in,

49principally from Ludhiana, very gradually, and it was not till April 1884 that

50the staff was complete. The operations lasted till April 1889, the whole

51establishment having been transferred elsewhere by then, with the exception of a

52few men who remained attached to the District office for a short time longer till

53places could be found for them in other settlements. A good deal of work

54remained over for me personally after that, principally because in the last year

55of the settlement proper I had to undertake a number of heavy pieces of work

56which were made over to me more because it was difficult to find any one else

57for them than because they really formed part of a Settlement Officer’s duties,

58but as far as the Settlement establishment was concerned the settlement closed

59in May 1889. The gross cost of the whole operations 1ms been Rs. 4,46,581,

60or in round numbers about Rs. 4,50,060. From this should be deducted

61Rs. 11,143 recovered from landowners and tenants as cost price of the final

62parchas given to them from the settlement and a little over Rs. 9,000 realised

63in the form of process fees, leaving Rs. 4,30,000 as the real cost of the settle-