Correct answer: (d) Neither 1 nor 2
Explanation
- A
1 only
(a) 1 only. Statement 1 claims jagirdars held land for judicial and police duties while zamindars only collected revenue. In Mughal practice a jagir was a transferable revenue assignment in lieu of military (mansab) service, and zamindars were hereditary intermediaries who also owed local order; the duty-split in statement 1 is therefore not the official distinction, so 1 only is not the key.
- B
2 only
(b) 2 only. Statement 2 says jagir assignments were hereditary and zamindari rights were not. The reverse is nearer the record: jagirs were generally transferable and not hereditary, while zamindari rights commonly passed in the family. Statement 2 therefore fails, and 2 only is not the key.
- C
Both 1 and 2
(c) Both 1 and 2. That code needs both statements true. Statement 1 misstates jagirdar duties, and statement 2 reverses heredity, so both-true is not the key.
- D
Neither 1 nor 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2. Jagirdars held temporary revenue assignments against mansab/military obligation, not a judicial-police land grant as statement 1 puts it. Zamindars were hereditary landed intermediaries, so statement 2’s heredity swap is false. With both statements out, neither 1 nor 2 is the official key.
Summary. Official key is (d) neither 1 nor 2. In Mughal India a jagir was a transferable revenue assignment tied to a mansab, not a hereditary estate given for police and judicial work. Zamindars were local hereditary intermediaries with a claim on a share of produce and customary local duties, not revenue-only collectors without any other obligation. Statement 1 therefore draws the wrong duty line, and statement 2 reverses which right was hereditary. Honour the stored letter (d).
Same topic · past papers
UPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.