With reference to Mughal India, what is/are the difference/differences between Jagirdar and Zamindar? 1. Jagirdars were holders of land assignments in lieu of judicial and police duties, whereas Zamindars were holders of revenue rights without obligation to perform any duty other than revenue collection. 2. Land assignments to Jagirdars were hereditary and revenue rights of Zamindars were not hereditary. Select the correct answer using the code given below:

The correct answer is D, neither 1 nor 2. Both statements describe the two offices wrongly, so neither can be accepted. A jagir was an assignment of the land revenue of a tract, given to a mansabdar in place of a cash salary for military and administrative service, not for judicial and police duty; the holder collected the revenue due and kept troops from it. Jagirs were transferable and were shifted every three or four years so that no noble struck roots in one district, and they lapsed to the emperor on the holder's death, so statement 1 is wrong. A zamindar, by contrast, held a hereditary right in the soil of his locality, collected revenue from the peasants and passed on the state's share while keeping a commission called nankar, so the hereditary part of statement 2 is exactly reversed. A, B and C are wrong because each accepts at least one of these two flawed statements. Exam tip: jagir was transferable and not hereditary, zamindari was hereditary and rooted in the locality.