C ha;et er_.U

THE DOBHI BLOCK

'

•

0

.--\ / ...... "'1 / ·.... .r , ..

( 'j-......... / \ I ...... , ,j'( C' '

0

/ UNRI / )..--~ r·-·/ / ,./ I \ I 8ARDIIIA / , ""-.._ ;, I ...

-f -~ ',.._, (1 5ATI4ESRA t'--- ~ -4.

I "'t\"''-,_ / '--..... c ) -UR MACHEIIATI j 1 \ / '\ -4 .. 14

-,· __.- /....._ DIHA .,, \')'-__ _,-....... \. ' / / ) /'. ', ...-" 1 I 1 I AUIIADI'Uit 7 ICAIWJIA.) __ ,... I I / I, I

r "-~ J 1 :- ..... ' >---~ .... ---<. I \ I ~ /SUIWCPUR / \ ~IIAWAH I

---(AMiliYA \ J_._, -- .._ 1 I -./ I I I I I .'""'\ 1 / I I If I 1 ' / I /----,not>~;., ' -RAUNA ', / I I ,----.~'"" \ ' o

-- .... [ / I / I ( .. _ .- I \

-1 KUSMHI J f KDEL- ~------1 · ,..,-------., i.._, I - - '\ "' ALlY A

... ~--- -- -~-- I _ .... { ~ 1

' ~~ r 1 , ---1--1 I "'

- I I ;1

I TARAON I \ I .; !-.. -

----j I ;i:~...( - --- f ' -- -·-.. ,..- · - - - -~ r- · I '~-- - I LEWMIWA r • ' ·-.../ 1 I I . .;!,

_ _ I \ KASILI '·r ·"' I I 5\

1,

- --- -, ' I 814~/ \~~r\ SllHAWNI / '----'..._ ~~,:iL- .

I I ' I --- ·- · - ---... ,/ ll.._IIAOSARI<~--(- - - · ., "' ---; KACHUWAND \ ''\,, /BADSNI), BDDARI \

ICHUJJift ; I -'/ KIOHI i /-\ x I IPOUKHRA/ I I /' ... f I I ....., I r, ; \ ,_. I -- I _.,-/ ~ -......._ __ / \ I / -, ,- ' ' • .,.. I _./ \ I 1 i '-·-. --~----~:~:- ...- '-c' 1o4AR1CPUR : _/ IIISANPUR ~' 1

C'

,- .... ')~-""' c; -·-·---,-- .... I -.......... 1/ I"' I -. __

i J . J lo!ARHI .-·/

---.! /---... { 1_.1 \.--. I •

' · .... ../ ATHARPUR I \_.1 ''·-...

BISAURt '>i-·'..-\ /I \

'\ __ _ __ ./ ( I'ATRAIII j • K AKARAPIJR I I •

...-", /GHUTTHA '-, -- \. ..... ,,____ I -- --"'

I /AMUYSNfl~',-...., ../,_?A

JBALRI.:~~I'~;{-... REIIARI ~-~-...r I 11 ~-~Qil'!"A

f,_ I I _..../-/ -~ I "( \ / I ~-1 / BAHIRI /-,' I J - .... ..... . -"' , ......... _,

I

!.!!.l!U -·---·- DISTIIICI __., ------ --YM ---rnl -------~--.., =--­------l--=='"Wit

Location and Oomposition

Dobhi Block is one of the twenty Blocks of Jaunpur

district. It was carved out on the 26th January, 1955. It

is situated in the eastern part of ti1e district. The Block

is boundaried by Azamgarh district in the north. In the

south, the river Gomti surrounds most of the Parts of the

Block and forms the southern boundary. In the east of the

Block Ghazipur district forms the eastern boundary, and in

the west it is connected with Kerakat Block. The Block

headquarters is Chandwak. It is situated in the northern Part

on Varanasi-Azamgarh road. Distance from Varanasi for

Chandwak is 29 kilometres and is well served by the government

run buses and private taxis. The district headquarters

located at Jaunpur is at a distance of 40 kilometres from the

headquarters and is connected by both road and rail. The

nearest railwaY station is Dobhi on a metre-gauge railway

line which is 3 kilometres away from the Block headquarters.

A pucca road connects Chandwak with Ghazipur. Although the

Block headquarters is well connected with Varanasi, Jaunpur

Ghazipur and Azamga.rh, ti1e road networks within the Block

are poor. There are few roads which cut across the Block at

Places.

At present there are 124 revenue villaGes in Dobhi

Block. These villages are marked by variations in terms of

71

size and population. Most of them are single hamlet dwellings.

Their number is 56. And 60 villages comprise more than one

hamlet, some of them consist of even five hamlets. But the

number of villages having more than five hamlets is

relatively lesser. There are only 6 such villages in Dobhi

BloCk. 1 some of these villages have a population of less

than hundred, while a few of them have several hundred.

Nearly 25 per cent of villages are merely extensions of their

main villages. They are located in the vicinity of the main

village and apparently look alike the hamlets. But they

enjoy the status of a village for all administrative purposes.

Taking into consideration the population of all the villages

of the Block as shown by the 1971 Census, they can be grouped

into thTee major categories. As such most of the villaGes

are small villages with a population of less than 500.

The number of sue h villages is 63 which constitute 51 per

cent of the total number of villages in the Block. There

are 54 medium-size villages consisting of 500-1999 population.

These constitute 44 per cent of the total villages. The

large-size villages comprising more than 2000 are only 6 in

number and constitute 5 per cent of the total number of the

villages. Out of these, 27 village Panchayats have been

constituted by amalgamating more than one villac;e. Rest of

the village panchayats oonsist of only one village each.

72

In our study these village panchayats have been taken up

as unit of a naJ..y sis.

Our survey data show that Dobhi Block is fairly a

large multi-caste area. All its villages are multi-caste

villages except one which is exclusively inhabited b.Y Ahirs.

Eowever, all the castes are not foLtnd in every villace.

There are a few villages wherein nearly five castes are

found. But in a large number of villages the number of castes

ranges between six to fifteen. The number of villages having

sixteen to twenw communities is lesser in the Block. In

the following table a consolidated picture is Presented for

the entire Block.

Table 2;1

Number of Castes and Villages

The number of castes represented

One to five

SiX to ten

Eleven to fifteen

SiXteen to twenty

Total

Approximate perce­ntage of the villages to the total number of villages

8

52

32

7

100

73

We have observed that the number of castes in a

village depends on its size, geographical location,

historical conditions and the original settlers. Therefore,

we find that the social composition and physical features

of most of the villages have similarities of various kinds.

At the same time there are dissimilarities als:> which

distinguish one village from another in ma~ ways. Generally,

the villages differ from each other not only in terms of

size and population but also in regard to caste-composition,

sta~us, prestige and power. Contrary to this, there are a

group of villages which are snaller in size and the number

of communities is also less. In between these two categories

of villages, there are some which are of intermediate level

in size. The number of castes found in these villaces is

also moderate. In view of these attributes, it is logical

to conclude that the villages in Dobhi Block differ from

each other in many respects. These variations are reflected

in terms of' size, structure and population. To some extent

such variations demarcate the respective boundaries of' a

village in regard to its prestige, power and influence.

Accordine to 1961 Census the total population of

the Block was 69,486 persons. Out of this, 33,230 were

males, and 36,256 were females. The population of Scheduled

Castes was 17,481 out of which 8,487 were males and 8,994

74

were ~emales. They were 18.33 per cent of the Block's

population. The total number of literates and educated

persons in Block was 12,737 consisting of 10,509 males and

2,228 females. In other words, there were 25.15 per cent

literates in the Block. 3 During the 1971 Census the

population of the Block registered an increase and 96,742

persons were enumerated. The total population of the Block

was revealed b.1 1981 Census was nearly one lakh. There were

99,202 persons out of which 48,450 were males and 50,752

were females. The number of literate persons in the Block

was 26,808 consisting of 19,911 males and 6,897 females.

They together comprised of 27 per cent literate population

of the Block. 4 We notice that the percentage of literates

during 1961 Census was 25.15 percent. It marked a ver.J

marginal increase during last two decades. Roughly 2 per

cent increase in the literacy was registered in the 1981

Census.

l!M.!Q:cy;_ The Socio-Economic Setti:gg

We do not ~ind a written his tory of Jaunpur district

prior to thl.rteenth century. The district, however, assumed

importance at ihe time of Feroz Shah during 1351-1388 A.D.

when this township was brought up. During the time of

emperor Akbar the district became an important administrative

arena. We find a mention of Jaunpur (the district headquarters,

75

Keerakat (the tehsi.l), and the Chandawak (the present Block

headquarters) in Ain-i-Akbari. In 1775, the district was

ceded to the East India Compa~ of Asif-ud-Daula. During

the British period, the revenue Pareana of Cl~ndwak or Dobhi

was settled in 1790 and it was brought under the British

rule in 1795. Jonathan Duncan, the early British Resident

in Benares (1787-1795) was mainly responsible for the land­

settlement in this region. 5 In this way the area fell under

effective British rule towards the end of the 18th century.

One of the most important aspects of the British rule was

the introduction of the Zamindari s,ystem and a new land

revenue policy. These cl~Ges made tremendous impact on the

socio-economic life of the area a1m its people.

The district Gazetteer of JaunPur mentions 72 different

castes excluding their sub-divisions which were found at the

time of 1891 Census in the district. Some of these were

insignificant in terms of their numerical strel\:,IJ"'jjh, while

some other castes were found spread in the entire district.

These castes have been described as the "most important

castes, of the district. Of the total Hindu castes, the

Brahmins constituted 13.39 per cent, Rajputs 9.24 per cent,

Ahirs 15.85 per cent and Chamar 16.65 per cent.6 A b:def

description of some selected castes is reproduced in order

to have a glimpse of their economic status and traditional

occupations. 7

76

~.!"~hmans: Majority of them bclorlt_r; to Sarwaria sub-clivisi ons,

however, some of them bel.G>ng to the sub-caste of Kanaujia.

Several of them are 1 ea.d mg landowners. As proprietors they

are next only to the Raj puts. .Al·thoueh UJ.Ost of tileo are

agriculturists, their cultivation is not of h.it;h order. They

depend mainly on hired labour. They would not handle the

ploueh themselves as it is considerod a taboo.

Rajputs: Rajputs are the most important caste of ~he

district. They assumed an important status not bec:1usc oi:

t~eir predominant position as proprietors but also because

of their close connection with the historJ mf the tract. The·r .;

were the exclusive landowners and c~ltivators. In most of

the cases they were over-burdened with co-s~1arers and troubled

by minute and constantly increasing sub-divisions. Bec3.use

of this fact, they lacked adequate acricultural skill, and

their habit of extravaeanc e cost them some loss of their

ancestral lands. The Raghubansis were the strongest of all

the clans whose concentration in Keerakat tehsil is quite

substantial even to day.

,!hirs: :;:,Tajori ty of ihem belone to ihe Gualba.ns sub-caste.

In the eastern part of ihe district a laree number of them

belonc to Dhindhor sub-division. Their traditional occupation

is cattle-breeding. At the same time they are mainly

agriculturists. Al thoueh they own little l3lld, nevert:-1eless

77

they cultivate substantial land as tenants. T~ey are mainl..v

an agrioul tural caste, and hence have acquired agricultural

know- how and stamina.

_Eoeris: A majority of fue members of the Koeris belone to

the Kanaujia sub-caste. They are the most careful and

laborious among all the cultivating castes. They generally

confine to the best lands for producing valuable crops hence

the rents are always high.

2ly,pnars: The Chamars name themselves as Jaiswars - a sub­

caste. They are spread all over the district and do not

own land enough io eke out their livelihood. dlost of them

are employed as cultivators and manual labourers. A

substantial number of Cha.nars are employed as tenants by

upper-caste landowners.

We hawe presented above a brief account of some of

the important aspects of ihe di·strict as a whole. H.R.liieveill g

gives an account of the o Iiginal settlers of Dobhi Block.

According to this version the Raghubansis settled in this

area after they had expelled the aboriginal tribes.9 In

course of time the entire area was shared by the twelve

Pattidars. 10 B.S. Cohn gives somewhat similar description. 11

It is interesting to note that a more detailed and

authentic description of these aenatically related

78

Raghubansis is found in a genealogical account published in

1919. It enumerates 24 villages of the Block alongwith the

names of their original settlers who had settled in several

villages in course of time. It also reveals that all these

settlers belong to Raghubansi 'clan' on1y. 12 And, their

common ancestor was Ganesh Rai as reported by earlier

scholars. Even today people are well aware of the various

pattis and their kins who belong to other villages of t..'f1e

region.

As it is evident from the above acc01m·\js, no history

of any other castes of ihe area other than Rajputs is

available. A reference to the castes like Ahirs, Koeris,

Kurmis and Chamars is found in the Gazetteer. l3 It is

probable that initially each village consisted of the members

of Raghubansi clan alongwith their agnatic kins. In course

of time the members of certain Hindu functionaT,Y castes were

broucht in the village to settle. The castes like Nai

(barber), Kumhar (potter), Bhuj (grain percher), Kahar (water

carrier), Teli (the oil presser ), Dhobi (washerman) etc. are

~ound in majoxity of the villages. Their number is, however,

quite small •

..Q.Mte 1 Land and Education; Pre-Independence Period

The land tenure system in Dobhi Block came into

79

operation around 1795 when the area was permanently

settled by the East India Compa.n,y. Under this settlement

the landowners with whom the land was settled had exclusive

rights over the land as long as they paid the land revenue

regularly. The landowners were de-facto owners as they

could manipulate the land laws to evict even the occupancy

tenanta. 14 The occupancy tenants were those who had received

right to cultivate land permanently after ihey had pa:id a

fixed amount of revenue to the landlords.

The accounts given by Nevill offers some idea about

the Close link that existed between caste and land in Dobhi

Block. It also indicates the distribution of land among

different castes of the region. He remarks: "Raghubansi

Raj puts ••• occupy the foremost Place am one the cultivators

and the Brahmans come next. Other castes include Ahir,

Koeri, Kurmi, Chamar ..• all e~joying the status of te~ts

of the landowning castes". (emphasis added). 15 It appears

that besides the Ra8hubansi Rajputs there were no Zamindars

from other castes. The following table shows distribution

f Z . d 16 o aiiU.n ars.

Among these castes Raj puts and Brahmins were the

local Zamindars. The other castes did not beloUG to the

ree;ion. They were outsiders. However, they ov.r11.ed land

in tbi s region.

80

Table hl

Distribution of Zamindar by Caste and the Proportion of land owned by them in Dobhi region in ihe year 1906.

Caste of the zamindar

Raghubans i Raj puts

Brahmin

Faquir and Gosain

Bent:;alis

Sheikhs

Bani. a

Proportion of land owned (in percen­t~es)

83.G

4.4

1.7

1.3

The revenue returns of 190G reveal that the total

area included in fu.e holdings was 32,723 acres, and of this

"no less than 56 per cent of the cultivated area was held

by the proprietors as ~ and Khudkast (under self-cultivation).

The reasons for this beinr; that the Raghuba.nsis (landlords)

cultivated most of their land themselves. Tenants at fixed

rate held 21 per cent, and occupancy tenants 13 per cent.

After deducting the small proportion of land which is held

'rent-free' or cultivated by expropriators, little more than

9 per C'f!il t remained in the hands o±' tenants-at-will" ( cf.) •17

This makes clear that since the beginninc~ of the colonial

rule the problems of tenants-at-will was not a serious one

in th :is area.

It follows from the above facts that even during the

year 1906 the land-owning Raj puts were cultivating over 60

per cent of their land themselves. The other castes nuch as

Ahir, Koeri, Noni a and Chamar were enj eying merely the status

of tenants. A very large number of them cultivated the land

as fixed-rent tenants or the tenants-at-will. They were

known as Sikimis. This indicates that during the British

rule, certain caste groups had monopolised land, and usually

they were ritually and s ocially superior castes. But

despite the fact that the Raghubansi Rajputs were the

dominant landowning caste and a lar0e proportion of land in

the area was owned by them, there were ver.J few big land-

owners from this caste. The simple reason was that from the

very beginning the land was divided due to ever growing

number of co-sharers. This fact is well brought out by

Nevill. -g:e remarks: " •.• the Raghubansis, though powerful,

never attained special distinction owing probably to their

peculiar practice of not recoenizing Primogeniture which has

led to minute su b-divis :ions and the absence of aey rulinG

1 . "18 ~ne. These observations are further substantiated by

the fact that near]y one hundred villages from Dobhi taJ.uqa

Paying about ~.28000 were divided into 18 ~1als which

belong to some 20,000 co-sharers. In many inotances

various pattidars had the share in the same villace •19

82

Thus, in principle the size of holdinGs de ~nded on the

number of agnetic kin in a lineaGe•

.9.2-.§te and Education

We do not have requisite data ::.t the Block 1 cvel to

show a.Y'~ relationship between the caste and e<lucation

particu.l arly during the pre-Inclependence period. nevertheless

the District Gazetteer contains a list oi schools which were

beine run in di~ferent villnccs of Dobhi Bloclc duriUG 1907.

The same is reproduced below.

It is clear from the table that there were as many as

13 sc tools in Dobhi Block in 1907. Out of these 8 were

pritJary schools and 5 were upper priE12.17 (middle schools).

The entire area had only -~w: gi1~1s ~_;rimary schools.

Altocetl1.er only 4 prima:r::r schools were adcl3cl, -~'~o.t is run

anC. o::.naged by the District Board by contributi.D.f; its s~are

towards the school expenditures. Rest of these schools

were exclusivel,Jr mn by the government.

The village-wise distributi,)n of the sc:-,_ools reveaJ_~:

t;1UJ.; t;J.ese YJere evenly distributed in the Block. :Almost all

the villages o~ the Bleck l.:.ad tl:ese schools within l'eacll

except the schools ibr girls which were in a few villac;es

only. It is :1otewo:rt:.w ·Lha t the i:ino schools :I'o r cirls v;err;

loc~ted in Senapur and Karhi vi:llcccs. Thane v;ere the

S .1\fO •

1.

2.

3 •

4.

5.

6.

7 •

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

83

Distribution of schools in Dobhi Block §~ing the ~egr 1907.

liJame of the Status of Averar;e-village where the school attend-the school ance in v1as located the

school

Chandwak Upper- 192 primary

Kanaura -do- 97

Guthauli -do- 82

SenaPur -do- 131

Senapur Lower- 18 primary

Mar hi Upper- 114 pr :imar,v

Mar hi Lowe~ 19 primary

Pokhra -do- 97

Kopa -do- 67

Jamunibari -do- 56

::salrampur -do- 48

Bardiha -do- 33

Koelari -do- 60

Source: The District Gazetteer o:f Jaunpur, Appendix-XXIX.

Remarks-

-·--

Girls school

Girls' school

Aided

-do-

-do-

-do-

-do--

84

most presti~ious villaees of the area. Incidently, both

the villages were the largest in size and also influential

politically. Perhaps for this reason they hnd the Privilege

to hsve each a prima:r"J Em.d a raiddle school. .At present,

Thlarhi is the largest villa~:e of the Block o.nd continues to

retain its status of beiUG influential and presticious.

Senapur too enjoys its traditional status,though it does not

belong now to Dobhi Block.

It is interesting to know that Cllandawak, the Block

headquarters has the oldest so bool of the region. ~oday,

there is also an Intermediace Collece. There are four

villages, namely, Senapur,Marhi, POkll.xa and Koelari which

have a High School each. We would discuss these aspects in

detail. later on in this cl:Bpter.

Another sir:;nificant dimension as revealed by the

table is the averaee attendance registered in these schools.

All the 1'3 schools have shown 1014 as average attendance.

In other words, ihis fi~re is also an indicative of the

total number of enrolments in these schools. Undoubtedly

this is poor enrolment. On an average the toi:BJ. enrolment

in eacli school figures to be 78 students only. The

enrolment of girls is very poor. It is only 18 and 19

respectively in the two schools. so far the primary schools

for boys are concerned, the number oi' students vc.::2-:i.es

85

be tween '3'3 to 97, rod the averac;e en:rolmen t per school beinr;

60. However, in the middle school, the average enrolment

works out to be 12'3 students per school.

The above accounts do not give any indication of the

relationship between caste and education in Dobhi Block.

nor we have aey other authentic data to throw licht on this

aspect especially during the period for which little

information is available in the Gazetteer. l'Tevertheless,

substantial information is available to confirm that the

Raghubansi Raj puts of Dobhi Block were the owners and

controllers of land. They were the Zam:indars. ITaturally

their influence and control extended also to the political

and soc ~1 affairs of the area. Tbey had several privileGes

includinc access to education. This fact is substantiated

by a remark about the Raghubansis of Dobbi talu.ka. It says

that "they (the Raghubansis) have remarkable aPPreciation

:for Primary education. n 20

In view of the wpe of social stratification that

traditionally prevailed in Dobhi Block, it can be argued

that education and caste were closely interlinked. The

highe ~1 caste people b e:i.ng in possess ion of the greater

measure of land were in a more advantageous position to

derive variety of benef'i ts. Those castes w::ich were hir;her for

in status bad better access to education. They ha<l oppor"'.;Lcn:.i_-~y/

86

access to education. Contrar.v to tl:is, other castes of the

Block enjoyed inferior social status and had relativelY weak

economic positmn. These castes were tenants with little

resources and negliGible opportunities for education.

These factors determined their 'worldview' towards education.

C onsenuent upon this the castes like Ahir, Koeri, Bhar and

other functionary castes of the J3loc1~ had nee;ligi ble education.

The educationalJ.y deprived caste was tbat of the "untoucl13. bles"

which was at the bottom of the caste and class hierarchies.

Thus, the lower castes with lower socio-economic status anJ

meagre landholdings had ver.r little education or no

education.

These observations aPPear to be conjectures. But

the role of caste as a factor in the educational achievement,

backwardness and deprivation cannot be denied. Even todaY

a close association between caste and education is

manifested in several ways. DesP.ite equal educational

opportunities to all caste and class groups, there are

considerable disparities in the attainment of education

among caste groups. Hie;her caste and class groups attain

hi~her and better education than lower caste and class

groups.

The above description explains relationship between

land and education. Since the ownershiP o:f land became a

87

resource base Particularly, the possession of land al~

facilitated educational achievement. Those castes wbich

possessed land also had access to education in the

broadest sense of the term. The hiGher castes, namely,

Brahmins and Rajputs were Zamindars, hence controlled land.

They had priv:ilege to acquire education also. Contrary to

tbis, the castes such as Ahir, Koeri, Bbar and Chamar ':lad

relatively lower social status as they did not have much

control over land. Consequently, these castes could have

very little education. However, several families from among

Brahmins and Rajputs sent their wards for hiGher education

to Jaunpur and Varana.si.

Q~ Lapd and Education since Independence

Our data show that Dobhi Block is fairly a large

multi-caste area. There are 35 castes in the Block.

These castes are spread over 84 village panchayats of tbe

Block. Some of 1hem are found in almost all the villages.

A few of t l::em have their concentration in some selected

villages. Thus, we find that in about 52 per cent villages

6 to 10 castes are found; in 32 per cent villages the

number of castes varies from 11 to 15. There are 8 per

cent villases in which l to 5 castes are found, and in

7 per cent villages the number of castes ranGes between

16 to 20. ll though agricul iure is the principal source

88

of livelihood for a number of castes, however, it is a

subsidiary occupation for same of these castes. some castes

persue agricultu~ along with some traditional and newer

occupations. The table given below shows caste-wise

distribution 0f households alongwith the ownershiP of land

in Dobhi Blook. 21

Table 2:4

Caste-wise distribution of househulds and ownership of 1 go.d in Dobhi Block J.l978-'Z9 J.

s:No. Caste A,pprox. No • of house­holds

Perceniage to total house­holds

Percentage to land­holding ( aPPrOX.) ---5 --~--------~----------------~3~-------·----4~ 1 2

------------------------------1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8 .

9 .

Brahmin (pr.i.e st) 894

Thakur ( cul ti-vator) 2015

Kayasth (writer, village acc~tant) 47

Bania (trader) 272

Ahir (cowherd) 1684

Koeri (vegetable grower) 293

Kumhar (potter) 263

Kunbi (cultivator) 4

Nonia (earthworker) 179

6.97

15.71

0.37

2.12

13.13

2.28

2.05

0.03

1.40

12.3

52.73

0.37

0.63

11.42

2.57

1.25

0.02

1.16

89

1 2 3 4 5

10. Gaderia (shepherd) 122 1.00 0.66

11. mallah (boatman) 406 3.17 0.97

12. Bin (woodworker) 25 0.20 0.12

13. sonar (goldsmith) 46 0.36 0.28

14. Lohar (ironsmith) 329 2.57 1.39

15. Kahar (watercnrrier) 347 2.71 0.66

16. 1\fai (barber) 142 1.11 0.35

17. Ba:rei (beateldealer) 55 0.43 0.21

12. :Sari (functionn:ry) 19 0.15 0.08

19. Gonr/Bhuja (grain-Parcher-) 128 1.00 0.27

20. Teli (oilpresser) 157 1.22 0.30

~1. Kalwar (trader) 15 0.12 0.10

2?. Knchi (trader) 13 0.13 0.03

23. Bhar (labourer) 994 7.75 2.99

24. Bhat (gnealogist) 1 o.o1 o.oo

25. Mali (gardner) 2 0.02 o.oo

26. Gosain (beggar) 33 0. 26 0.17

27. Dharikar (basketmaker) 42 0.33 0.11

28. Nat (acrobat) 28 0.22 0.27

29. Pasi (labourer) 80 0.62 0.44

30. Khatik (vegetable f'rui tseller) 270 2.11 0.21

31. Chan:nr (leather-wo :rker agricultural labourer) 3273 25.52 G.98

90

1 2 3 4 5

32. .Hela (sweeper) 9 0.07 0.01

33. Dhobi (washerman) 120 0.94 0.26

34. Musahar (leaf platemaker) 124 0.97 0.17

35. Muslim (weaver) 406 3.17 0.94

The above table brings out the following facts

e minen t:cy': ( i) number of caste groups, (ii) caste-based

occupations, (iii) number of households and their percentage

to total number of households, and (iv) caste-wise ownershiP

of land. These facts throw some liGht on social and

economic structure of Dobhi block. numerical streneth

and land indicate to some extent these two as dimensions of

power.

It is evident that a large number of castes have poor

numerical strength as well as meagre land ownership. There

are a few castes which hgve relatively low numerical

strength, but own a high proportion of land in the Block.

Some castes are substantial in numbers and also own a fair

amount of land. Cont:rary to this, a few castes have qtU. te

low numerical strength as well as meagre landownership.

Interestingly, there is one caste which is numerically most

preponderant but poorest in terms of land ownership. This

91

is a general Pattern of relationship bet\·;cen cu.ste and

lend ownership in the Block.

Thalrurs comprise of 16 per cent of the total house­

holds, and own 53 per cent of the total land. Brahmins are

about 7 per cent of ihe total households, and O\':n 12 per cent

of the total land. These two castes are traditionally

zamindars in the Block. If these two castes are put together,

their combined strength in regard to the numerical rePresen­

tation would be about 23 per cent, and they own 65 per cent

o f the total 1 and of the Block. Traditionally, these two

castes are at the ix:>p of the caste hierarchy. Despite beinc

numerically a minority, these two enjoy dominant socio­

economic position. Next to thisalliance is the caste of

Allirs who occupy third ra.nlc in the ovmership of l3nd. They

constitute about 13 per cent of the total househol d.s, and own

about 11 percent of the land. The Koeris form 2.28 Per cent

of the total households and own 2.57 per cent of the land­

holdings. These two castes enjoy almost equal social status

in the caste hierarchy. They are agriculturists, and were

recognised 'Peasant castes' in the Past. They were the

'fixed-rate tenants' Prior to the za~dari abolition.

There is another alliance of eleven c~stes. These

are· Bania, Kumhar, Nonia, Gaderia, Mallah, Lollar, Ka..'l1.ar,

Nai, Gonr/Bh.uj, Teli, and Bhnr. T!leir numerical stren.c;t;h

92

in the Block varies considerably. Some of them constitute

as low as 1 pe~ cent of the total households, while others

as much as 8 per cent. The Bhars, for in::rtance, constitute

roughly 8 per cent of the totaJ. households and own a bOut

3 per cent of land. next to the Bhar, the Illallah consti tu·be

3 per cent and own 1 per cent landhold.incs. The functionary

castes such as l:Jai, Kahar, Lahar, Kumhar, Gonr and Teli have

approximately 1 to 2 per cent numerical strcneth and each

one of them owns 1 ess than one per cent of the totcl. land

in the Block. Being functionar-.r castes, they are found in

almost all villages of the Block. A large number of i:hem

pursue their traditional occupations alonewith some subsidia:ry

occupations.

The Damas comprise of about 2 per cent of the to tal

households, and own less than 1 per cent of land. Some of

the castes whose traditional occupation is trade and commerce

have also been clubbed with Banias. For instance, Teli,

Kalwar and Bhuj are sometimes referred to as Bania. The

reason being that these castes also sell their products in

and are engaged in shop-keeping. In most of the cases, we

noticed that Kal..wars and Telis have identified themselves

with Ba mas which is honorific in the locaJ. caste hierarchy.

:3ania is very close to other :functionary castes in terms of

their t ra.di ti anal o ccupa. ti ons. Mallahs are marginally

93

associated with agriculture. Some members of these castes

were tenants in a :few villages, but a large number of them

pursued their respective traditional occupations. rrowever,

all the eleven castes mentioned above comprise 26 per cent

of the total households, and 11 per cent of land.

The table also sho•;.s that ti1ere are a few cas·lies

which have meagre numerical stren,eth and marginal la.ndholdill(;s.

Each of these castes constitutes less tban 1 per cent of the

total households and land. The castes such as Bin, Sonar,

Bari, Kalwar, Bhat, :Mali and Gosain fall in this cateeory.

They live generally in l.lig villages. Their services arc

required on specific occasions.

The Scheduled Castes in Dobhi Block are locaJ.J..y knovm

as Harijans. There are eight communi ties which have been

listed as Scheduled Castes. These are Dhal~kar (basketmaker),

Nat (acrobat), Pasi (labourer), Khatik (vegetable/fruit seller),

Chamar (leather worker, agricultural labourer), Hela (sweeper),

Dhobi (washerman) and Musahar (leaf-plate maker and labourer).

Of the total households, 31 per cent belong to Harijans.

Harijans in Dobhi own approximately 8 per cent of the total

land. They occupy the lowest rank in the caste hierarcbw.

Formerly, they used to cultivate as tenants and share­

croppers and also work as acricultural and manual labourers.

94

Today they depend upon aGricultural labour within the

village on manual work elsewhere. The Nats are an exception

to this. The Chanars are numerically the most preponderant

caste as they comprise of 25 per cent of tire total houoe­

holds, and own 7 per cent of the total land in the Block.

Majority of them are az;ricul tural workers and menials.

Barring the Khatiks all other Harijans are quite marGinal

numerically as well as in terms of landownership.

The Muslims as a group are a sne.ll minor.i. ty group in

Dobhi Block. They are found in a few villages. About 3 per

cent of the households of t!:1e Block belOD£; to I:Iuslims. They

own less than 1 per cent of the total land in the Block.

Qgste, Class and Land

The concepts of caste and class are much in wider

circulation in the studies of social stratification. Y .Sin@.

has examined critically the adequacy of concepts and

theoretical scbemes adopted in the studies of social

stratification in India. He has presented a detailed and

comprehensive discussions of the concepts and theories

relating to caste and class in understanding Indian social

realities. 22 K.L. Sharma refers to a number of misgivings

about the concepts of caste and c.lass particularly with

reference to their application to the understandinJ of

95

Indian social reality. 23 In a recent article Sharma advocates

for an approach which has dialectics, history, culture and

structure. He argues that an approach havine these four

essential features is necessary for the understandine of

oeste and alass in India. 24

The account presented so far relates to caste

composition and landownershiP in Dobhi Block. Our data

regarding caste and ownership of land are also relevant for

analysing class structure. Caste in Dobhi Block is closely

related with class. Such ooneruenoe are reported in other

parts of the country too. 25 There is a 0reat deal of

overlap between caste and class. The landowninG castes in

the pre-independence era such as B:rahmins and 'l:halrurs

continue to own major portion of land even after the

abolition of the Zamindari system. Ahirs and Koeris were

tenants earlier. But to-day they are no more sheer tenants.

They 0\7n land quite substantially but it is still much less

than owned by Thakurs and Brahmins.

The castes which did not own any land in the Past

were those of artisans and functionary and service castes.

Til acksmi th, potter, barber, water carrier, washerman etc.

own very litt.le land todaY.

Another important class in Dobhi Block is that o~

the landless agricultural labourers. Chamar, Pasi and

Musahar arEl enga,3ed mainly in agricultural labour. But

some of them were tenants-at-will. Generally, all ti1e

Scheduled. Castes are landless or O\m Tileagre land. In terllls

of their numerical strength, they are most preponderant.

Thus, class structure in Dobhi is concomitru1t with

caste structure. An upper-caste group enjqys not only

higher status in caste hierarchy, but its members are also

economically quite well off. C~nversely, a lower caste

group suffers both socially and economically. 3~t 3rahmins

occupy the highest rank in the c~ste hierarchy followed by

Thakurs, However, in terms of economic status both the

castes were the zamindars earlier. In the second category,

the Ahirs and the Koeris enj qy the status of agricultural

groups, and are rated superior to the rest of the castes

in social and economic terms barring Brahmins and Tbakurs.

The lower castes include artisans and functionaries. The

castes of this catego:cy are inferior to that of the above

mentioned categories, but superior to the Scheduled Castes.

They include all the Scheduled Castes such as c~, Pasi,

Khatik, Musahar, Hela, Dhobi and Nat. The Muslims

constitute a se:J;E.rate group outside the Hindu caste-fold.

In Dobhi Block, they enjoy low socio-ec anomie status.

The table shows that the castes which are higher in

caste-class hierarc~ have the larGest share in land

97

Table 2;5

Caste, c Jass and land in Dobhi Block

1r'S.s :re::g:roup No.of a'! ass Caste- Percent- Land castes status class age to owner-

posi- total shiP tion No. o:f (Percent-

house- ace land-holds holding) ----

Upper- 2 Zaminda.rs Higher 23 65 castes land-

owners

Intermediate 2 Land- Middle 15 14 castes owning

ex-tenants

Lower- 22 Artisans, Lower 28 12 castes village

functio-naries

Scheduled 8 Ex- Lowest 31 8 Castes tenan-ts

at-will-cum landless labourers, menial workers

11uslims 1 Wesvers Low 3 l

Total 35 100 100

98

ownership. Contrary to tbi s, the castes which are lower in

the caste-class hierarchy do not 0wn much land. In between

these two categories are the castes w11ich enj ay middle

rank in caste hierarchy as well as in terms of landownership.

Another point that emerges from the table is the inverse

relationship between numerical strength of a caste and

ownership of land. It seems that there is a definite

correlation between the two. Lower the numerical strength

higher the landownershiP; hicher the numerical strencth

1 ower the landownership.

Our analysis reveals that even duri~: the post­

Independence period the Patter-.a of landovmership of various

castes hc:s not changed significantly in Dobhi Blocl~. The

Abolition of Zamindari system in U.P. in 1952 is considered

an important event to set in force maey structural changes

in rural society. Our data shows that several tenants

acquired ownership of land consequent upon the zamindari

abolition. But it did not offer much to them. The land

owned b.1 different zamindar castes has remained almost

unaffected. However, it is true that landownershiP is more

differentiated today than what it was earl:ie r. Land reforms

have brought about many structural changes, and these have

added new dimensions to the existinc relations.

99

Traditional aerarian relations in Dobhi Block have

undergone significant changes . These changes are not iced

in the realm of inter-caste and inter-class relations.

The changes in asrarian relations have assumed sienificant

dimensions. Tenancy reforms have weakened the relations

between the landlord, tenants and labourer. Jajmani system

has weakened. The degree of interdependence between various

castes has reduced considerably. The emergence of new

patterns of relationships based on contractual terms between

the ex-zamindars, ex-tenants and the agricultural labourerG

have transformed the reciprocal oblig-ations.

The Block is marked by wide disparities in the

ownership of land. Those vbo own relatively lareer hol dines

have started functioniD£; as 11 capitalist farmers". The rich

farmers are generally from amonc; the Ti1akurs. A large

number of landowners with small holdings are engaged in

subsistence agriculture. Further, a large number of them

own marginal holdings. Below the subsistence farmers are

the groups of marginal farmers, artisans and the service

groups. The agricultural labourers occuP,1 the lowest

rank.

~ith a view to improve one's economic position or

elevate f'rom extreme poverty some people have migrated

100

to towns and cities for better employl!:ent. The new non­

traditional non-caste-based occupations have attracted a

substantial number of people to various industrial cities,

namely, Kan;pur, Bombay, CaJ.cutta and Delhi. .Agricul tu.ral

lnbourers have been gain::; to Panjab :Lor seekinc seasc-mal

employment at the time of ~Ervestinc;. As a result of these

changes many Thakur families in Dobhi Block find it hard to

c:et aerioul tural labourers. The-J have started ploughing

the fields themselves w:lich they had ncrver done in the past.

some of them have leased out their lands on sharecroppinG

basis. Such lando...-mers p:refer to enGc~-e;e the nbackward

castes" as sharcoropp ers and shift them from one farm to

another to avoid any claim for tenancy by tl"Em.

The p:roccss of such changes !lD.s begun for quite some

time in the Block. Simon observes in Senapur village that

economic developments bring major cl'la.nges in the relative

economic positions of the various classes in the village.

However, such changes have been observed by soc iaJ.

scientists in other 1)arts of the country as well. 11(. L.

Sharma in his study of six villages of Rajasthan bas

noticed how some croups which were economic~ly hic;her

have lo"t'lered down iP inferior positions due to structu~~al

26

101

changes. He notices that few ex-landlord :families ha:ve

slided dom in class status - what he refers to "proleta­

rianization•.27 There are a number of studies which

d et1onstrate how new forces are disru.pti~ the traditional

pattern and are produciilG economic and political s:::stem that

no longer depend on caste.28

While discussing the relationshiP bcTh7een caste and

education durinG the pre-Independence pe:·iod we have noted

that there were 13 educa"'GionaJ.. institutions in Dobhi. Block

in the yeax 1907. Of those, 8 were lower primnry and 5

were upper primar,r schools. The total number of average

enrolments in these schools were 1014- on]y. The Block

did not have any high school or college in those days.

~e have also noted that glaring disparity in regard to

educational attainments also existed among the various castes

in the Block.

Dobhi Block h::e witnessed a spurt of educational.

institutions after Independence. In due couxse of time a

substantial number of educati([)naJ. institutions viz. schools-

Primary, middle and high schools, and Intermediate Colleges

and a Post-Graduate Coll er:e have been established in the

102

Block. At present the total number of educational

institutions in the Block has increased to 70 as compared

to 1'3 in 1907. The number of primary schools has increased

nearly siX times. In addition to this, a number ofididdle

Schools, High Schools and Colleges have come up which did

not exist earlier.

Table (2:6) shows that there are 54 primary schools

which are evenly clistri buted in the Block. Eo.ch of these

serves rou ~y two villages fa.llint; in the radius of 1 to

2 kilometres. Spread of the 9 junior High Schools, 3 High

Schools and 3 Intermediate Call eces is quite even. Generally

distance from a village to High School and an Intermediate

C allege does not exceed more than 3 to 4 and 5 to 6 1."1D.s.

respe tively. However, the only Post-Graduate College is

centrally located.

It is surprising to know that desPite the present

network of schools and colleges in the Block many people

are illiterate. According to 1981 Census, the BloCk

registered 27 per cent literacy, which signified an increase

of 2 per cent on:cy compared to ihe last two decades.

Literacy in the Block cnn be analysed in terms of its three

components: the students, the teachers and the non-teachinc

st-..aff. We would like to see at these components in terms

-'

103

1!.l>le 2:6

Educational institutions in Do"9hi __ B1.9ck

-------------------------------------1.

2.

'3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Primary school (Boys)

Primary school (Girls)

Junior High school (Boys)

Junior High school (Girls)

aigh School

Intermediate college

Post-Graduate collage

1'TUmb ET

4'3

11

6

3

'3

3

1

Co-educational

Exclusively for the cirls.

3 are Private aided, rest are ma:naced by Zila Paris had.

Ziln-Pnrishad n:.anaged exclusively for the girls.

Private aided, co-educational.

Private-aided, co-educn ti onal.

Affiliated to the University of Gorakhpur, U.P., co­educational.

Total 70

Note: All the above institutions are recognised qy tbe Government. There are a number of private nursery schools such as Shishu I~andir, Bal Niketan etc. functioning in different villaces of the Block. Besides theae, few primary and junior high schools were also found fUnctioning in a few villages. All such insti tu ti.ons are not recognised yet left out of our study.

104

of their caste and ownershiP of land. In order to .:ain

proper understanding, caste-'I"Jise distribution of 5053

randm:r(lY selected students studyinc; at different l·3Vels has

been c;iven here.

S. -Caste Uo.

Table 2.a.1

Caste composition of students in ~_QQ.j;io:g.~ti..till~~.

--------------------------------------1 2 3 4 5 G 7 8

Intermedi­Q.te collea Boys Girl

9 10

-----~-------------------------------------------------1. Brahmin

2 • T hal.-u.r

3.

4.

5 •

6 •

7 .

8.

~.

Total o:f Upper Castes

Kayastha

Ahir

Bania

Koeri

Kumhar

Gaderia

Nonia

10 • lliaJ.lah

114

248

362

214

73

19

37

34

17

46

218

264

2

72

41

8

7

5

93

367

460

2

166

35

38

20

18

7

5

27

179

20G

2

11

8

2

57

304

3Gl

3

137

17

16

14

14

8

10

3

72

75

1

1

65

287

352

5

105

12

13

6

7

11

4

3

11

14

1

1

105

-·------ ---1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ----------·---11. sonar 19 8 4 2 3

12. Lohar 75 39 33 2 16 9

13. Kahar 52 19 25 4 10 8

14. Nai 25 (.) 9 2 5 2

15. 13nri 11 3 3 1 1 1 2

16. Gonr/Bhuj G 2 16 4 7

17. Teli 4 2 5 ,.,t

10. TI~1ar 32 4 55 3 9 6

Total of lliddle Castes 614 216 440 37 271 3 204 2

19. Dharikar 3 2

20. Pasi 16 3 8 4 4

21. Khatik 48 12 4 2

22. Chanar 278 73 268 14 152 8 122

23. Dhobi 9 2 6 4 5

24. Musahar 32 9 1

Total O:f S.C.s 383 99 289 14 160 8 134 2

25. r.'IusJ.ims 40 9 17 6 6 5 Total of all castes 1399 588 1206 263 798 86 695 18

Grand totaJ. 5053

-- -----------

106

The table shows that school-gOiD£ children belong to

25 castes. There are no children in the schools from at

le13.st 10 castes. These castes include even some intermediate

castes such as Kachi, Bhat, Barai, Gosain, Mali and Bin.

From among the Scheduled Castes only Hot and IIela do not

send their children to schools. All these castes are

numerically weak in the BloCk.

The upper castes dominate at all the levels. Thakurs

and Brahmins have fairlY large number of children at P:ri mar<J,

Junior, Eigh School, and the College levels. School and

College attending boys and girls from these two castes are

41.44 per cent of the mtal enrolment. Also, the number of

cirls going to school and college is hichest aoonc Brahmin

and Thakur. However, it is numericaily the smallest caste­

group in the Block.

Students belonging to the intermediate castes are

less than that of the upper castes. The students in this

category are drawn from as man;y as 16 communi ties and they

constitute 35.36 per cent of the total students. :But their

number lowers dovm in the hi:_her classes. Enrolment of

children from among Ahirs is more than other groups of this

category. The students bel.Ont:;ing to this ccste are found

107

at varic-'us edwmational levels. The number of cirls is

quite necli£;ible at all the levels with exception at the

primary level.

The Scheduled Castes are 31 per cent of the total

population in the Block,but students belonGing to this

category constitute only 21.55 per cent of the totnl students.

Though they have considerable enrolment at the upper primary

level (6 to 8 classes), their drop-out is very hieh in 9th

and lOth classes. A.t the intennediate classes (11th and

12th), the drop-out fUrther increases. Chamars, corresponding

to their numerical strenGth, have also a high proportion of

enrolment at different levels. Socio-ec anomie gradations

are reflected in the sphere of education in the Block.

Although proportionate rePresentations of students belonGing

to the upper, middle and tbe Scheduled Castes is seemingly

not indicative of vast difference but when compared with

their respective numerical strength in the Block different

picture emerges. On the whole, the student enrolment

figures are not congruent with the numerical strength of

various castes. In addition to this, the number of students

in the hi[jler classes comes down. This trend is prominent

among the middle castes, but it is more so among the

Scheduled Castes. A vast gap exists in the enrolment

lOB

Patterns o:f students belo!lbing to the Scheduled Castes and

the non-Scheduled Castes.29 At the pximary school level,

the enrolment of students belonging to other castes forms

74.7 per cent, and that of the Scheduled Castes 25.3 per cent.

The enrolment percentages for VIth to XII classes for these

castes are 82.8 and 17.2, respectively. The enrolment at the

undergraduate and post-graduat~ levels works out to be 90.25

per cent for the other castes, and 9.09 per cent for the

Scheduled Castes. The enrolment of Scheduled Caste students

shows that on an average, 33.03 per cent students were

enrolled in Primary Schools, 18.43 per cent were enrolled at

junior High Schools, At the High School level, their

enrolment was 19.20 per cent and at the Intermediate level

it v1as 10.32 per cent. However, their enrolment at the

higher classes was 9.08 per cent only.

From the above facts some inferences may be drawn.

For instance, the hieher education C~~raduate and above

including professional degrees) is largely confined to the

higher castes. It is negligible among the intermediate

and lower castes. To substantiate this assumption we have

analysed the voter list of the Dobh.i graduate constituency

for the year 1978. Out of 442 voters, 353 voters belonc; to

the upper castes. The intermediate castes have only 42

109

voters. Of the renaininc 2 voters, 1 is a Chamar and the

other is a Muslim. The caste identity of 42 graduates

could not be ascertained. Further, Thak~rs have the

highest number of graduates (311), followed by Brahmins

(42) and Ahirs (25). Other castes have graduates ranginc

from 1 to 5.

Caste Composition of Teache~s

Now, we could a:r:alyse the situation in regard to

teachers workinc in different educatiol~l institutions of

the Block. It may be noted that the teachErrs and the non­

teachizlc staff overwhelmincJ_y bel one to the Dobhi Block.

We have collected data ~rom 51 primary schools

{including 11 girl's school), 5 Junior lligh Schools, 3 Hich

Schools, 3 Intermediate Colleges and 1 Post-graduate College.

Thus, we h~e data from G3 educational institutions out of

70. Altogether information pertaining to 666 employees

consisting of 542 teacbers and 124 non-teaol:ers has been

gatm red.

The majority of teachers belong to upper castes.

The Thakurs have the largest contingent of teachers.

l'Tearly 73 per o ent of tile teachers are Thakurs and B:tehmins.

The teachers belonging to the middle castes constitute 17

Per cent. From amone; the middle castes, the ADirs have

110

the highest number of teachers.

~e .1.;.§

Caste composition of teaohers in educational. institutions of Dobhi Block.

-s-:--caste Ci- status of-the education.aJ. institutions Total no. the and their numb e:rs

teacrer Primary Jr. Hieh Inter- p~ school hi€#l so rJOol mediate coll-Boys Girls school COlle- ege (40) (11) (5) (3) ges(3) (1) (63) __ 1 ___ 2 ___ 3 -,- ; 6 7 ~ 9 __ ..., _____ --

1. Brahmin 34 5 4 4 12 1 60

2. Thalcur 124 32 26 L1rO eo 33 335

Total of 153 37 30 44 92 34 395 upper castes

3. Kayastha 5 2 2 9

4. :Sanin 1 1 1 3

5 • Ahir 37 1 6 1 45

6. Koeri 5 1 2 1 9

7. Kuohar 3 ~ 4

8. Kunbi 1 1

~. Gaderia 1 1

JO. ~.Tallah 1 1 1 1 4

11. SonGX 1 1

12. Lohar 2 1 1 4

13. Kahar 2 1 1 4

111

-1 -·---- 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 ------- -------------~--------------·-- .. -·.-- ___ .. ___ . -----14. rTai 2 2

15. :Sari 2 2

16. Ehor 1 1

Total of 57 4 5 3 15 6 90 Middle Castes

17. Pasi 1 1

18. Chamar 37 7 1 4-5

19. Dhobi 1 1

Total of s. c. 38 8 1 47

20. I.1uslims 2 1 3

21. Unnpe cifi ed 2 5 7

Total 257 55 36 47 107 40 542

Grand To-tal 542

tlne highest number of teachers. There are 47 teachers who

belong to the .Slcmduled Castes. They are 15 per cent of

all the teachers. The Chamars have the ~ugh est number of

teachers from among the Scheduled Castes. Pasis and Dhobis

have 7 teachers each.

The above facts show a pattern of distribution of the

teachinL; job in Dobhi Block. The teacmrs at the primary

l.evel are more from amonG the non-dweja castes. Their number

112

is innignificant at hichcr levels.

All the Hich Schooln, Intermediate CoD_eges and the

Post-Graduate college are priV8te institutions aided by

Government. All the managing committees are controlled by

the influen tials from amonc the ~·bakurs. They enj CJ'.J

c~.·nsiderable prestie;e, power and influence. They control

recruitment in these insti tutiuns. :Present pattern of

staffinc is a clear indication of their dominant position.

At times they do not hesitate in vio1.'3.tion of rule:::; and

res;v~ations. The Sc~1eduled Caste peo}Jle are aPl;ointecl.

normally at the Primary level. :10\-:eve::_·, t'1e arena of

in~l_uence of t~ese dominants is far mJre rJide than c·lesc

institu·cions. For naniPulating aP})Oin~ne:at:::; they u:;c their

political, caste and other net~orks.

Te~qhers anq. Their LariL1.oldin..&§

Table (2:9) provides data regarding distribution of

landholdings among the teachers of the Block. The general

Pattern is not quite <lif:ferent from the one based on caste­

wise distribution. However, some broad trends are :11;table.

The te~chers in each caste are characterised by differential

landownership. A large number of teachers a.Done; the upper

castes own substantial land. Only 2 per ce rrt o:f ·tileD o~·:l1

land leoo than 1 acre or are landless. :=ajorit-y oi: ·t.;!lei::

O'MJ. land from l to 5 acres ('~0 .75 1;e2· cent) and nearly 3l

113

per cent own G to 10 acrec of lan:1 • 13 .16 1)er cent of

the teachers own lanU. from 11 to 15 acres, and o. few O\Vll aore

than 15 acres. The intermediate castes are next to the

upper castes corres~Jnding nith their soci~l position.

T'Wenty per cent teachers in tbis catecor-J are lanclless or

own less than 1 3-Cre of land. A large wajority of them

(61.12 per cent) own 1-5 acres of land, and 16.66 per ce:i.l't

of them own 6 to 10 acres. Only a small number, that is

2.22 per cent of the teachers, are substantial landovmeTs

(11-15 acres). None of them own above 15 acres of land.

36 .17 per cent of t:te Scheduled Caste teachers are landless

or own less than 1 acre of land. .A substantial percentaGe

of the teachers (55.33 per cent) ovm 1-5 acres of land,

and only 8.52 per cent ovm. G-10 acres. I.:ost of the teac:1ers

own land in the range of 1-5 acres. More than 45 per cent

of teachers belOJ.lG to this bracket. About 26 per cent of

the teachers O'llm. 6 to 10 acres of land. The landholdings

between ll to 15 acres is largely confined to the upper

castes, above 15 acres it is absolutely owned by Thakurs

and Brahmins. The landlessness is more pronounced amone

the ~ cheduled Caste teachers.

The table also s · ,ows that V'J.riations in lanclormershiP

exist between t!1e teac'1ers of vnrious caste ;;roupa. :I'he

differential landowners hip is no !iced not onl~c bet~.'lee~1

114

~]2d.e 2;9

~d owning patteri].s amone: the teachers of Dobhi Block

--~---------------Caste ~rou:ps

ITigh castes

Middle castes

Sohedul Erl C o.stes

K:uslims

Unspecified

Total of all castes

Larrlless/ Below 1 a ore

8 ( 2.02)

13 (20.00)

17 (36 .17)

2 (66.66)

2 (28. 57)

47 ( 8.68)

---~·---·-· .. ·--__ ._.._. ____

-~--Land owned in acre§ 1 - 5 6 - 10 11 - 15

---161 122 52

(40 .75) (30 .91) ( 13.16)

55 15 2 (61.12) (16 .66) ( 2.22)

26 4 (55.31) ( 8.52)

1 (33 .33)

5 (71.43)

248 141 54 (45.75) (26.02) ( 9.96)

--

15 and above

52 (13 .16)

52 ( 9.59)

Note: The figures in the bracket indicate t:1e percentace.

Total

395 (100.00)

90 (100.00)

47 (100.00)

3 (100.00)

7 (100.00)

542 (100 .oo)

115

various castes, but it is also found between different

families of the same caste. Most of the teachers ·who belone

to ·Ghe upper castes and own substantial land serve in the

Hich Schools and Colleces. Those who own less land are

employed in the institutions at lower levels. This holds

also true in oase of the teachers who oelon,:: to the

intermediate castes •

.Qaste Com;eosition of Non-teaching Staff

The non-teachine positions such as clerks, i:;;;'Pists,

r:lccountants, Jabo:ratory assistants, lib:>:a:rian a..nd the library

assistants are mainly held by the upper cnstes. The Thakurs

have monopolised these po si. tions followed by the Brahmins.

The lower positions such as daftaries, peons, watchmen and

the watermen are held by the intermedia t;e castes. The Kahars

and the Ahirs have the largest share in these positions

followed by Gonr. The smallest number of positions held

amone the non-teaching staff are of Malis (gardner).

Sweepers and farash. The Scheduled Castes work as sweepers

and farashes.

The table shows that the intermediate castes have

the largest number in the non-teachinG staff. Of the total

sta:.C1, 51.61 per cent bela~ to these castes. The UP.t;er

castes have 42.74 per cent, followed by the Schedulai Cnstes

116

which have o:nJ..y 4.33 per cent. There is only one employee

from amonG the :.:uslims.

Although the strength of the upper castes is nuch less

t1_1B.n the middle castes, yet the top position::; are held by

t'1em. The Thakurs alone have 86.99 pe~~ cent positions.

The middle castes hold much less positions t~1an the upper

c-astes despi tc the :fact that their number is rnuch more tl1o.n

the upper castes. However, the lart:;est nLUnoer of the non­

teaching staff have been recruited from t:ne Kahars, 1:eine

traditionally a caste of domestic servants. i~ear].y 58 per

cent of the total employees belong to Kahar, Nai n.nd Bhuj

castes. Ahirs are preferred for the job of watchman. There

are 3 Chamars, 2 Helas and 1 Pasi in the non-teac llinc; staff.

'!:'hus we find that the composition of non-teac hint; staff

does not strictly follow the caste line as it is in the

co.se of the teachers.

~est of the upper castes non-teaching staff are

literate. Only 4 persons are illiterate in this group.

There are 17 employees who have studied upto 8th class,

and 26 have Passed High School and Intermediate. The Thakurs

have G graduates. A large number of non-teachinG staff who

belong to the middle castes, are illiterate. There are 17

persons who have studied upto primary and middle levels,

8lld 9 have pasoed Hi!Yl School and Inte :~r:eclia te. OnJ.y 2

117

~ble 2:10

Caste-wise distribution of non-teachinG staff in educational inotitutions of Dobb.i. Block.

--- ----s. Name of Status of educational in3titution§ Total No. the caste Jr.High High Inter. p • G.

SchOol School 0ollec;e Jolleee (No.2) (No.3) (lifo.3) (No.1) (9)

1. Brahmin 4 3 7

2. Thakur 3 4- 19 20 46

'I·otal of 3 8 22 20 53 upper castes

3. Kayastha 1 1

4. fu:n.i.a 1 1

5. Ah.i.r 1 1 9 4 15

6. Koeri 1 4 5

7 . Kumhar 1 1

("') Kunbi 1 1 u.

9. l'ronia 1 1

10. Gaderia 1 1

11. Kahar 1 5 8 7 21

12. Nai 1 1 1 1 4·

13. Gonr/Bhuj 1 4- 6 1 12

14. Bhar 1 1

Total Of middle class

4 13 26 21 G4

15. Pasi 1 1

16. Chamar 3 3

17. Hela 2 ,., '-

Total 0 f s. c. 2 G

1 2

18. MusJ.im

To~l

Grand total

118

3 4

7 21

5

1

53

G

43

7

1

124

124

Graduates are there among these cas·tes. The Schedu]_ed Castes

have 7 employees, out of w:uch 6 are illi tera·:;e and 1 has

education upto prim~J.

jTon-teaching Staff and Their Landholdings

The class background of the non-teaching staff in terms

of landownershiP reflects the same pattern as observed in case

of the teachers. But this trend is mainly confined to the

upper castes. In the case of the middle and the Scheduled

Castes ~roup it is quite different.

All the hi,:;her castes non-teachinc; staff ovm land.

The majority of them own 1-5 acres of land (60.37 per cent).

18 • 36 per cent 01·.rn 6 to 10 acres and 7 .4 per cent ov..rn 11-15

acres. However 11.32 per cent non-teaching staff own above

15 acres of land among the higher castes. ,A)!long the middle

castes more than 50 per cent of the staff are landless or

own less than 1 acre of land. 4~ .43 :uer cent own 1-~ acres

o:r land. Contrary to this, !35.71 per cent of the non­

teaching staff among the Scheduled Castes are landless or

119

own less than 1 acre. Only one of them Oi'.rns 1-::; acres of

land. The landoV1nership above 5 acres is totc.lly absent

among the non-teachinr::; staff belonginz, to midclle ao i?ell as

Scheduled Castes.

It is quite clear that amonc, the non-teachinc sta:f:f

the caste hierarchy soes aloll{;wi th the cla::;s hierarchy.

The relative status of a caste C.etermines the class po ::ti. tion

of its members. The continuance of hi&her caste domination

in the educational insti tu ti ons cleaJ-.. ly demonstra. tes the

power they weild and privileees they enjoy •

.]2i stri but ion of Power and Priviler;e

We have observed that a definite relationshiP between

land and social structure exists in Dobhi Block. Caste, l~1d

and education l1avc be en found closel;y interrelated. Now, we

would discuss distribution of power and privileges in the

Block. Socio-economic status is linked vdth the distribution

of power and privileges.

We do not have a~ authentic data about how power

was weilded in the traditionDJ. S)ciety o:f Dobhi. However,

we would presume that caste and zamindari were the main

institutional determinants of the rural power structure.

Power was directly or indirectly associated with caste amd

landownersh:i..P. Ownership o:f land conferred pres"'..;i[~e and

120

Table 2;11

Land owning pattern~ong the !J.On-J1_Q_aching staff of Dobhi Block.

--~--·--·--~------ --~--------------Caste-Groups ------~nd owned in acres Total

High castes

t:iddle castes

Scheduled Castes

Total of all castes

Landless below 1 acre

1 ( 1.88)

33 (51.36)

6 (85.71)

40 (32 .25)

1 - 5 6 -10 11 - 15 Above 15 acres

·----·-------~----------

32 (60 .37)

31 (48 .43)

1 (14.28)

64 (51.61)

10 (18 .86)

10 ( 8.06)

4 ( 7. 54)

4 ( 3.22)

6 (11.32)

6 ( 4.83)

53 (100.00)

64 < 100 .oo)

7 (100.00)

124 (100.00)

------·--- ------..----·-----~--

Note: Fic;ures within brackets indicate perceni:age.

121

economic domin~lce to the owner. It also accorded a privileged

position to enjoy a high "eeneralised statv.s". Tho::::>e c~stcs

which controlled land also monopolised power. Since PO'.ver

was linked with caste and landownership, the T~1aku:rs n:1o

owned la11d also occupied the hi@est rank in the pov;er ~1ierarchy. It '

·.>'.:-~hey nere t~e zamindars, and b;:r virtue of this :pooi tion they :t.' q ...

d <\ continued to enjoy v1ealth, ::privileces o.nd socbl status for

~~':-1.:::....*· generations. Some of them occupied the positions o:f

~barda.r and ~14.§.. These positions ·ne:re hereditary and

bestowed administ:rotive powers. Thus, property, education,

networks and ~eredi tary positions were the factors which

accorded high status to the Thakurs of Dobhi.

next in the traditional power hierarchy were raiyats

and occupancy tenants. They were drawn :from the A.hir, Koeri.

Ironia, Bhar, and Uallah castes. The Ahirs and Koeris were

the main peasant castes. They were relatively better off in

comparison to other castes. At the bottom of the power

hierarchy were the functionary and service castes. Some of

these ~ad also sooe power by way of association with some

doninant ~amilies. But the castes like Dhobi, Khatik, Pasi,

!'.iusahar and Chamar \'ICre at the bot tom of power hierarchy.

I."a;j or.L ty o:r them were la:-ldlr:ss. :\ fevJ of them ·.verc cerJO.~lts-

at-will, while most of t:1em ,·;orked as a:;ricu.l tural and

nanuo.l labourers. They formed the bulk of the local poor

122

a:':r:C:i1£CDent c f relations to the advanta.ce o:.':' Thakur s. Other

clasces in pow()r hieJ."D.j~cty had often no al te:r:nativc but to

depend on those VJho weilued :PO~Ver and in::.."luencc. Even :for

ordir...arJ amenities they llnd to d'2lJCnd on then in vcryinc:

decrees. Consequen-'li upon such a d.tnation, the zamimars

h::H1 substantial sa~r even in dny-to-dcy affairs. To ::;owe

extent it a~fected a1lli rcculated inter-caste, intra-caste and

ii~:tcr-pcr sonaJ. relations. Cohn'30 ob~erves that durinc; the

days of zat:rind.ari system, the lmllilo :13.-labour and tenant

relationship was primarily of soc io-cc onomic tie which was

so clo -c that in case of a dispute auong the landlo:rds tile

labourers and tenants supyorted even to the extent o:f doinc

violence to each otl::en.~s' opponents. Similar observntions

have been made about in other parts of India also.?:il

The patron-client relationship was institutionalised.

Landlord::; co nsidcred it t.l-J.eir moral duty to protect their

labotu"'Cr-cum-tenants and o iher dependent families from

outside pressures ancl help them du.rinc socin.l and ec anomi.c

crisis. Even effarts VJere t1ade by the lan<Uords to l'ersv_ade

mcnbers o:r a caste :from other villac;cs to settle in their

123

villages. Ths.y were given land for house and soQe land on

rent in addition to some land as gift.';) 2 Obviously such

efforts on the pa:rt of the landlords v;ere made to ensure

rer:ular services by those people rat~1er than to help ther1.

It fOllOYJS :e:-om the above :::ccovnts that the Thcl;:urs

were ov-;ners and controllers of land. Their imJ..uence and

control also extended to social and political affairs. Their

dominance influenced Greatly socic:l relations in the villages.

The entire gamut of relations - social, economic and political,

both within the caste and between the castes was characterised

by these distinctions.

Generally speaking, power and authority of Thaku:rs

was not limited to the village where they lived. It extended

to a number of villages. The ranGe of power and authority

was determined by the 11 genera.lised status" of a :family. The

status of a family was d etenninro by its zamindari rights.

The 'power-zone' of the family could be demarcated by the

extent of the zamindari rit.;hts that a given :tamily had.

It was closely associated with the distribution of the

zamindari lands in terms of villages. There were some

fanilies whl.ch had their zamindari lands in several villages.

some had in one villar;e only. Contrary· to this some

fanilies owned land in two to :Live villar;es and some in siX

124

to ten villages. There we:r:.e a number of families which

had. th~ir lands in as many as fourteen villages •. Qu.i te a

few of them owned land in the villages outside the :Block

also.

The share of the agnetie k:i.ns into the lands was very

important factor in determ:ilti.ng social status of a family

in Dobhi Block. There were no families which had exclusive

zamindari' rights in land in a particular village. A number

of families had shares in varying ratio. Some had more ;and

others had less. This constituted a hierarchy among the

zamindars. In a sense uneven distribution of power and

privileges among those fan:ti.li·es was both a cause and a

consequence of their varied statuses~. some were more

powerful and privileged, whereas others were lesser

privileged and powerful. Few families were denied power

and privileges.

Another related dimension of power and priviiege

.was distribution of tena·nts in terms of their number, the

communi ties they belonged to and the zype of tenancy. rights

they were gra.:rtted. The status of za mindar :families was

. also evaluated· in terms of the castes of their tenants; · ..

their numerical strength and the number of villages they

belonged to. In principle, Ahirs and Koeris were the

fiXed-rate tenants, and enjoyed higher status than the

125

tenants-at-will who were at the bottem.

Broadly speaking, asymmetrical power relations existed

parallel with caste hierarchy. Like the upper, middle and

lower castes, there were substantial power holders, those who

had limited power, and there were those who had little power.

Thus differential distribution of power among different

families was primarily linked with their respective caste

ranks and economic standings which in tu..r.a was determined by

ownershiP of land. However, some families enjoyed power and

prestige based on resources they controlled other than land.

Members of these families were engaged in lucrative jobs.

They were mainly in professions.

Qontemporary Power Structure

Community Development Programme and the Panchayati Raj

institutions have been very important events for rural people.

The objectives of these institutions were to initiate a

process of transformation of social, economic and political

life o_f the ·villages through a number of programmes of

'Planned change'. Conse~uently, some offices and posi tiona

were creat~d. Economic resouxces, funds and opportunities

were made available. We would.like to di.scuss the role of

Village Panc~ats, Cooperative Societies and some

educational institutions existing in the Block.

126

There are 84 statutoiY Village Panchayats and 9 Nyaya

Panchayats. Members of these institutions are from all the

major castes. The caste composition of the Village Panchayat

members indicates that nearly 34 per cent are BYG.hmins and

Thakurs, and the same is found in the case of the intermediate

castes. 30 percent of the members are S.C.s and 2 per cent

are Muslims. But Pradhan (head of village panchayat) is

elected generally frem the higher castes. In majority of

the village panchayats positions of power have been acquired

by the upper castes. The inte:rmediate castes and the

Scheduled Cast~s hold these positions congruent with their

caste ranks.

Table (2: 12). shovs that Thakurs and Brahmins continue

to weild power. More than three-~ourths of the village

pradhans belong to these two castes • However; the Thakurs

have the largest share. The intermediate castes occuP,y

nearly one-fifth of positions. The ~rs have emerged as

a dominant caste next to the Thakurs. The Scheduled Castes

are numerically quite strong, but in te:rms of power they

do not matter much. Only 6 Pradhans belong to them.

U though B:re.hmins and Thakurs continue to hold power,

there is gradual decline in their domdnance. The ~rs

have been consolidating their position. Th~ now share

power with the B:re.hmins and Thakurs. But the Tha.kurs

127

Tabie 2; 12

Caste-wise distribution of village pradhans in 84 village panchayats in respect of l~st j;hree elections.

s-. No.

Caste of Pradhan

_ 'Electio,p...,..years _ 1972 196G 1955

Total No~ of Prad.han

liercen­tage to total , ________________________________________________________ _

1. Brahmin

2. Thakur

3. Kayastha

4. Bania

5. Ahir

6. Koeri

7. Mallah

8. Bin

9. Bb.ar

10. Chamar

11. Muslim

Total

9

52

15

1

1

3

2

1

84

--------------------------

14

55

12

1

1

1

84

10

56

1

1

10

1

1

1

3

84

33

163

1

1

37

3

1

1

4

6

"2

252

13.10

64.68

0.40

O.t40

14.68

1.10

0.40

0.40

1.58

0.79

lGo;Qo

continue to hold political power and also dominate in many

other s_pheres. The Ahirs ~ve emerged as a well-off '-......_ .

middle oas~~_ther middle castes and lower castes do not

appear to. eiD.joy notic::eable political influence~·

128

.An analysis of the Nyaya Pancb,hayats shows that a11

the positions o:f Sarpanc.tes were held by the upper castes in

the last three elections. The Thakurs alone occupied 80

per cent o:f. positions and the remaining 20 per cent went to·

Brahmins. Members of other castes could not head the Nyaya

Pane .taya ts •

An analysis o:f 252 pradhans in tenns of their

education may be given here. Of all the pradhans belonging

to the upper 0astes; nearly 28 per cent are either illiterate

or they are literate without any formaJ.. education. 54 per

cent of the pradhans have studied upto middle school, 12

per cent have studied upto High School and Intennediate.

Only 7 per cent of them are graduates and above. The

pradhans belongiiDg to the middle castes have large

percentage of illiterates (56 per cent). Nearly 40 per cent

have studied upto .primary and middl'e standards. The

remaining 3 per cent have studied upto High school. 83

per cent ofcthe pradhans l:.elonging to the,s.c.s are

-~lliterate or literate without a~ formal education. One

pradhan belonging to the S.C. has studied upto High School • ....... __ ""' -

Out of 2 Muslim pradhans, 1 is illiterate, the other has

studied upto ~te.rmediate.

The majority of the pradbans are engaged in

·agr1ctilture. ~ome o£ them are 1n service, and a £ew are

129

Table 2..t±2

Fossessiolil. of land among 84 village Panchaya.t pradbans of Do.,l>&lQ..Q,.c_k __ • __________ _

·----------------·------~------~--------)aste group_ Land owned in acres "''pto 6-10 11-15 1t6ove 15 5 acres

Iigher castes 47 53 25 il (2'3 .97) (27 .04) (12.75) ('36.22)

Middle castes 26 15 6 1 (54.16) ('31.25) (12.5 ) ( 2.08)

:Scheduled _, _, '3

Castes (50 .00) (50.00)

Muslims 2 (100.0)

Total 78 71 '31 72 ('30. 95) (28~17) (12~-30) (28 ~~57)

Note: The figures in brackets indicate percentage.

Total.

196 (100.00)

48 (100.00)

6 (100~00).

2 (100 .oo)

252 (100'.00)

engaged in business. The pattern of landowning is not

·-diffe.;-~nt from the general ])Stte::rn. as evidenced from the

'following-.'table (2: 13). '--.,

The table shows same broad patterns of landowning.

A large number of pradhans own land upto 5 acres. This

pattern gets reversed in the case of upper castes. The

majority of the pradhans belonging to the twice-born castes

130

are big landowne :rs. The pradhans belonging to middle casltes

depend on land, but only a small number of them are substan-.

tial .landowners. The Scheduled Caste pradhans also own

land, but their holdings are quite ~1.

~aste and CooperaJ4ve Society

Cooperative societies too in Dobhi Block are dominated

by the upper castes~· Our survey of nine cooperative

societies indicates that all the positions of Chairman were '

held by Brahmins and Thakurs. In 1978-79, seven Thakurs, . . one Brahmin and one Koeri were Chairmen of the societies.

ChairmanshiP of the societies have remained confined to

these castes only. In addition ix> this, sane of the chairmen

have remained in office for several years. They are

economicallY well of~ and politic~ly influential persons

both within and outside their villages. The pattern of

membership in these cooperative societies also shows dominance . . of the upper oastes.

The distribution of members shows two points:~ Firstly,

out of ·35 castes in the Block, membership is confined to 9

castes ():nly. · It is sig:ni~icant to note tbat the upper and

middle castes have more members compared to the lower

castes. Sec·ond.Jy, a majority of members (68 per cent) are

Brahmins and Thakurs. The middle castes are scantly found

131

in the societies. Roughl,y 18 per cent members belong to

this category. The Ahirs have more members than other

Table ?; 14

Caste-wise membership of nine cooperative ~ocieties in Dobhi Block_in 19]8-79 8

S.No. Name of No~ of the Percentage to the caste members total number

1. Brahmin 1217 11.56

2:· Thakur 5937 56.40

3. Kayasth 132 1.25

4. .!Ahir 1175 11.16

5. Koeri 445 4.22

6. Kumhar 151 1.43

7 • Musahar 18 0.17

8. Chamar 930 8.84

9. Dhobi 60 0.57

10. Uns·pec if'ied 462 4~::39

Total 10,527 100.GO

'in the societies.- RougbJ.y 18 per cent members belong to

this ca.tegory. The Ahirs have more members than other

castes of this category. The Cba.mars have largest

membership ~rom among the Scheduled Castes.

132

Q~te and Ancilliajy Organization~

We hsve also examined the campo si tion of some .

anc:illiary organizations which are functioning in the 84

village pancbayats of the Block. We notice the dominance

of upper castes in these organizations also. For example,

caste-wise distribution of the Presidents of 84 Yuvak Mangal

Dals in the Block pertaining to 1966 and 1976 has been

analysed. The data for the year 1966 indicate that 66

presidents out of 84- are Brahmins and Thakurs. Of these,

11 are Ab.:i:rs and 1 each is a Kayasth, a Bania and a Muslim.

Only 2 presidents are Chamars~ Remaining 7 presidents

belong to other castes. The caste composition of 84

presidents pertaining to the year 1976 indicates similar

pattern. However, the number of presidents belonging to

the upper castes has decreased in the decade due to the

fact that the castes like Koer:i, Kum.har, Lohar and Kahar

have claimed~ever seme of these positions.

The oomposition of Toli Nayak (leader) of Yuvak

Mangal Dal (youth welfare organization) is not different

from what we have obs:nved above. The caste-wise distri-,

bution of 84 Tali lil'ayaks indicates that 59 belong to upper

castes, 8 to middle castes and 5 to Scheduled Castes~·

Remaim:ng 12 belong to other castes. Among them Thakurs

are 4-6, Brahndns 13, Ahirs 4 and Chamars are 5.

133

Somewhat identical picture emerges ~rom the analysis

of the o~fice bearers o~ the Executive Committee of the

Kshetriya Y~ Samiti, a voluntary organisation in the Block •

. The position o~ President, Vice-President; Secreta:cy and the

Treasu~er have generally been occupied by the upper castes.

Out o~ 12 positions, .8 have been held by Thakurs, 2 by Ahirs

and 1 each by Brahmins and Muslims.

~~~_§~ Educat~l Institution

There are' other sPheres o~ institutionalised activities

which o~~er insights.into the understanding o~ Patterns o~

power and privilege. ~ study of the educational institutions

in Dobhi Block provides some vital facts. In order to have

a deeper understanding, we have conducted in-depth study o~

nine Private-government aided educational institutions.

Out o~ these one is a Post-graduate College, three are

Interme.diate Colleges, three are High Schools and remaining

two a~Junior High Schools. All these institutions have

been established in the Block at various points of time.

The ~ounders o~·these institutions were Thakurs. These are

managed by Managing Committees.· The goverilJl1ent grants them

~inancial help upto 90 per cent o~ their total budget. The

autonomous character o~ these institutions ensure minimum

inter~erence from the government.

134

The composition of these managing committees provides

useful sociological insight. It helps us understand as to

how ~hese are organized. We also know about relations (~--.

between ~he~· me~bers, their background, networks and the I •

mode of f'unctioning. These institutions are an important

means of social, ~conomic and political power. These are

some of the modern resmrces which are often used for exploi­

tation, manipulation and control over the people. Those who

are in the managing committees Play a decisive role in

recraitment of teachers, non-teaching staff, and admission

of students. The managers among ihem enjoy considerable

prestige, power and influence.

The orgamsationa.l structure of nine managing GOmmi. ttees

shows that a certain class of people control these institutions.

The following table shows social composition of the managinp

committees. The table shows that the Thalrurs have got

substantial dominance .in these institutions. The members

of the managing committees are drawn frem Thakurs alone.

They are ala o leaders and burc:;aucrats. . The. po si. ti on of

President, Vice-president, Manager etc. have·alwaws been

occupied by them. The incumbents of all the 77 offices of .,

power have been university and college teachers, Memberf' n.P

Parliament, Members of Legislative Assembly, retired

bureaucrats, ~ich farmer-cum-businessmen and advocates.

135

,1\J.l of them belong to Dobhi Block except four persons who

are outsiders.

S .lifO.

1.

2.

3 .

4.

5.

6.

Table 2;,.12

Soc :ia.l composition of the managing committees of nine educational institutions.

Status of Caste of the members the member Brahmin Thakur Sonar Chamar ---Members 1 123 1 1

Manager 33

President 27

Vice-President 12

'Deputy ~ger 1 4

Total. 2 199 1 1

---

Note: The figures relating to the members pertain to fue current members only in 9 educational institutions·~· .But

To~a1

126

33

27

12

5

203

the figures ~ho~ against the positions of power (Sl.No.2 to 5) include all those who held these po si. tiona since the inception of these institutions •

.i>.!.§.i!'l but ion· of Privilee;eEJ

Since the inception of Dobhi Block in 1955, a number

of measures have been introduced to transform social,

economic and political life of fue people !i! f the mock.

136

!A number o:f programmes o:f 'Planned change; have been

init.iated. Substantial resources, :funds, opportunities

including technical know-how have been. made available

through various channels. o:f distributive system. Intensive

developmental e:f:forts and resoarce allotments constituted

a chain o:f opportunities :for ~arious groups o:f people.

The opportunities thus made available have created

competi t.ion among those who want te avail such opportunities.

This has resulted in an uneven distribution o:f bene:fits, some

less·Privil~ged and some are under-privileged. In this

section we want ·to examine the nature o:f such institutionalised

bene:fits and the sOcial composition o:f the bene:ficiaries.

Our analysis is confined to some selected schemes introduced

:from time to time. There are several studies in India

whic.tlll give a comprehensive account o:f these aspect.s.33

some o:f tbe schemes initiated in the beginning

related~ to' ·the basic amenities. These include sabsidised

loans :for the construction o:f wells, repair o:f wells,

installation o:f hand pumps, c~nstruction o:f co~ost Pits,

etc. ·such sc remes were mere prevaJ.ent during the Per:i,.od

1~55-60. But during 1965-68, grant o:f subsidised loans

under 'grow more :food sche~' was promoted. Funds were

made available :for developing irrigation ~esources. Such

schemes were again intensi:fied during 1973-78. The BloCk

137

provided technical and financial help for installation of

personal primp sets. Besides the above schemes a number of

other schemes were in eperation through the cooperative

societies and other developmental agencies. The major

thrust remained on agricultural developments. However, at

a later stage emphasis was laid on the development and

promotion of small-scale industries, and other allied

economic activities. In due course of time, the nature and

composition of schemes changed under the 20-Point Programme.

Our data show that the upper castes in the Dobhi

Block have not only been able to retain their existing

privileges, but they have been also to expand the arena of

these Privileges.

Nearly 63 per cent of the total benefits have been

extracted by Brahmins and Tbakurs. The families belonging

to 12 middle castes received nearly 15 per cent of the

total benefits. Only 5 per cent of total benefits have

reached the SohedW..ed Castes. Different eastes have been

benefitted in the following order: Thakur, Brahmin, Ahir

and Chamar. The ownershiP of .land is a1.so ·found in the

same descending order. Thus, land ownership and benefit

from governmental resources are found coterminus. Class

ranks also coincide with this alliance. Thakurs and

138

Table_2; 16

Caste-wise break-up of beneficiaries in Dobhi Block for the xears 1955-60, 19§5-68 aDd 1913~78

-S .1\TO. Caste of beneficiaries Total Percentage Number to total

1. Brahmin 99 8.98

2. Thakur 593, 53.71

3 .• Kayasth 1 0.09

4. :san± a 7 0.63

5. .A.h±r 93 8.42

6. Koeri 14 1.27

7 • Kumhar 2 0.18

8. liJonia 13 1.18

9. Gaderia 5 0.45

10. Lohar 14 1.27

11. Kahar 1 0.09

12. Nai 1 0.09

13. - Bari 2 0.18

14. Bha.r 8 o. 72

15. ~!at 1 0.09

16. Pasi 1 0.09

l"l. Chamar 54 4.89

18. Muslim 8 0.72

19. Unspecified 187 16.95

Total 1104- 100.00

139

Brahmins are landlords, Am ra a:re peasants , and the c hamars

are agriculture le.bou-2rers.. Findings of simiJ.a:r nature '

have been reported by other social scientists who have worked

earlier in other parts of the count:r:y. 34

The number of beneficiaries from among the upper castes

.has come down over the years as some of the schemes are meant

exclusively for the lower sections of the rural society.

However, some of the schemes have benefitted a small section

of people. For instance, the consolidation of landholdings

took place in early siXties in Dobhi Block. It facili~ated

loans and subsidiaries under various schemes. Those castes/

families which possessed viable landholdings could avail of

loans and subsidies during 1965-68 and 1973-78. Thakurs and

Brahmins were benefitted more than a~ other caste. However,

quite a few families of other castes were also benefitted.

Likewise, there were few schemes for which subsidies were

provided by the Block. But these schemes had a class bias,

and therefore, they benefitted a small minori w of well-off

people. For example, 37 families has installed gobar gas

Plant towa:rds the end of 1977. Out of these 31 were

installed by Tbakurs, 4 by Brahmins and 1 eaeh by Abir and

Koeri families. Similar Picture emerges when we analyse

the composition of the owners of tractors in Dobhi Block.

Almost all of ·them are owned by the upper castes who ·

14G

purchased them availing loans from banks.

In order t0 ascertain the distribution of economic

benefits among the members of the societies information was

collected in respect of 9 cooperative societies functioning

in the Bl0ck. Instances were f0und where credit provided to

some members had been manipulated in fav0ur of a few

influential members. So much so fertilizers, seeds and

several other items provided on the credit basis were sold

by the p~or members te the members of higher castes. This

was done in order to meet pressing consumption needs and

unavoidable s0cial obligations •.

.Q,2nclusions

Summing up, the analysis of data suggests a close

interconnection between caste, land and pewer. During tiD.e

pre-independence period a close link existed between caste

and land. The zamindari system and the caste system were

the GVerall insti tutiona.J.. determinants of the rural power

structure. Those castes which o:>ntrolled. land were' at the

top of the power hierarchy. The ovmershiP of lan~ generated

a network of-rel~tionship with other castes affecting '-

intercaste and interpersonal ties in several w~s.

The close link be·tween caste, land and ]lower ·continues

in the contemporar.v power structure of Dobhi Block. H0wever,

141

few changes are also noticed. Some interesting patterns

of relationship between caste and landownership are observed.

There are castes with low numerical stren~h as well as

insignificant landovnaership. Some castes have a small

numerical strength but possess a large proportion of land­

holdings. A foew caste groups are substantial in number but

have only moderate landholdings·. A numerically most

preponderant caste owns a meagre landholdings.

The distribution o:f power and privil·eges with re:ference

to caste rank, landownershiP and positions of power indicates

a shi:ft. The power positions o:f the traditional landed

-castes and groups are being shared by those castes and

groups which .bad remained deprived in the Past. Hence,

power has remained as a relative phenomenon and a structural

reality both in the pre-independence as well as in the post­

independence era.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5 .

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

rr.

142

£!2tes gnd Refere~

c·.ompiled from the Census of India, 1961, District Census Handbook Uttar Pradesh, 50, Jaunpur District, ·:Allahabad, 1966.

Ibid.

Ibid.

The B. D.O. 1 s Office, Chandawak.

Cf. Shrinath Singh, Modernisation of Agriculture: A Case Study in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, New Delhi, Heritage Publications, 1976, P~33.

H.R. Nevill, JaunP~r, A Gazetteer, Volume XXVIII, The District Gazetteers of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh, Allahabad, Gevt. Press·;· 1908.

Ibid., PP. 79-80. «'•'-

Ibid., PP• 204-205.

Ibid., p:'Bo.

Ibid.' p".206.

B.S. Cohn, Structural Changes in Indian Rural Socie-cy, "1596-1885 in Land Control and Social Structure in Indian History (ed.) Robert Eric Frjrkenb erg, New Delhi, Manohar lhlblications, 1979, PP.64-65.

Pandi t SaJ.igramj i, Raghukul Bansh~wli (Hindi) , Bare.illy, Ramagya Press, 1919, pp.6-10.

H.R. Nevill, op.cit., P:2o7.

Shri~th Singh, c;>P .cit., p.l70. . . ' H.R. Nevill, op.cit., P.207.

I.bid., PP. 207-208.

Shrinath Singh, op.cit., p:l70.

143

18. H. R. Nevill, op ~cit:, pp:·ao-81.

19. Ioid., PP •. 207-20B.

20. Ibid.

21. The data relating to the caste-wise distribution of household and land is not available in government records. Present data were generated during the field work. The village pradhan, elderly persons of the v.illage, traditional caste leaders were requested to give an estimate of the total number of households of .each caste alongwith aPProximate land ownershiP of.the respective commnity found in the village. The help of the Lekhpal (village land record keeper) was also sought. in some cases. This process of data collecting is streneous but rewarding. However, these are estinates but believed to be very cl®se to the actual figures. .

22. .. Yogendra Singh, Social Stratif ieation and C.ha.n.ge in India, I'ifew Delhi, Ma:mhar, 1977.

23. K~-L. Sharma, Essa.vs on Social Stratification, New Delhi, Raw at Publications, 1980, pp~"~1-26.

24. K.L. Sharma, Caste and Class in India: Some C oneeptual Problems in K.L·~ Sharm:t ( ed) Social' Stratification in India, New Delhi; Ma.noha.r, 1986, pp: 29-61. .

25. K.L." Sharma, The Changing Rural Stratification System (.A Com!2rative Study of Six Villages in Rajasthan in India), New Delhi, Orient Longnan, 1974.

26. S.R. Simon,

27. K.L. Sharma, 1974, op.eit.

28. Two studies- one by Andre Beteille, Caste, Class 8lld Power, London, University of Calmornia Press, 1971 and the Mono gr-ciPh by F. G. Bailey , Caste and the Economic Frontier, Mancbester University Press, 1957, could be referred here." There are other studies also which focus upon changes consequent upon external forces wbich become operative · especiallY after the Independence.

14-4-

29. Raxrjeet Singh and ·B.L. Yadav, The Enrolment of Scheduled Caste Stud en is at Different Levels of Education: A :Study of Dobhi Block of Jaunpur District, Paper read in the Workshop on Education of Scheduled Castes: ·problems and Perspectives, October 28-29, 1985 at S.G.R.P.G. College, Dobhi, Jau.n:pur.

30. B.S. Cohn, The Chamars of Sena;pur: A Study of the Changing Status of a Depressed Caste, UnPublished Tbesis, Cornell University, 1954-.

31. A.C. Parvathamma, Landholding Pattern and Power Relations in·a MYsore Village, Sociological Bulletin, Vol.XVII, No·~-2, Sept. 1968, PP;~;'203-204-.

3 2 • Shrina th Sin@:l, op. cit. , p ~ 17 4- • .....

33. See for example, W.H. Wiser and c.v. Wiser, Behind Mud WallS, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1963; Oscar Lewis, Village Life in Northern India: Studies in Delhi Village, Urbana, University of illinois Press; 1958; Yogendra Sin@, "Changing Power Structure of Village Communi tyn in A. R. Desai (ed) Rural Sociology- in India, Bombay, Indian society of Agricultural Economics, Bom"'bay, 1961; L~·r. Rudolph and S.H. Rudolph, The Modernity of Tradition, Chica·go, University of Chicago Press, 1967.

34-. Andre Beteille, 1971, op.cit. andK.L. Sharn:a, 1974-, op. cit.