Bhavnagar City and Villages, 1931
This article has been extracted from DELHI: MANAGER OF PUBLICATIONS |
NOTE: While reading please keep in mind that all articles in this series have been scanned from a book. Invariably, some words get garbled during Optical Recognition. Besides, paragraphs get rearranged or omitted and/ or footnotes get inserted into the main text of the article, interrupting the flow. As an unfunded, volunteer effort we cannot do better than this.
Readers who spot errors in this article and want to aid our efforts might like to copy the somewhat garbled text of this series of articles on an MS Word (or other word processing) file, correct the mistakes and send the corrected file to our Facebook page [Indpaedia.com]
Secondly, kindly ignore all references to page numbers, because they refer to the physical, printed book.
Towns, The City Of Bhavnagar And Villages
61. Reference to Statistics.-Imperial Table III classifies the urban ana. rural population of the State by Mahals; Imperial Table IV classifies onlythe urban population, and shows its variation since 1911; and Imperial Table V gives. the ~gures of, relig~ous composition?f t~e urban population. Only' the proportionate figures will, therefore, be gIVen m the margmal and Subsidiary Tables ,embodied in the letter-press.
6,2. Definition of Town.-According to the Census Code, Municipalities,.
Cantonments and Civil Lines and all other places having a population of more
than' 5,000, which the' Provincial Superintendent may decide to treat as such
for Census pti~poses, are towns. This State is concerned with only one 'aspect of
this definition; as there is no place with a population of more than 5,000 without
a municipality.. All the Mahal head-quarters like Umrala, Lilia, and Talaja with:
a population below 5,000 come under the category of Census towns on account of
theirhaving,municipalities. Since 1911, when the Imperial Tables for the State
were'for the•first tim~ printed in the form of a booklet, the towns have remained
coinCident. 'Their number and area have remained unchanged. Moreover, with
the ,solitary' .exception of the Mahal of Victor, all head-quarters of Mahals.
are towns. ,Discretion is given by the Code to the Provincial. Superintendent to•
treat 'as town'it place without a municipality, when its population exceeds 5,000'
and possesses a truly urban character. The possession of the latter characteristic
is, however, to be assumed in the case of a municipal area which is to be
ipso facto consigned to the category of a town, even if its population is:
below 5,000.
The population living in towns is regarded urban, and the rest rural. The idea behind this classification of population into urban and rural is "to separate people living, in sparsely settled regions and small villages from those living in towns: and cities, on the theory that the former lead a more individualistic life,. while the latter lead a more communal life," I it being also supposed that the u~ban and rural populations live and work under different conditions.
As only the municipal centres have been treated as towns, there is not the least likelihood of any fluctuation being recorded in the urban and. rural-population of the State by the transfer of rural places to' the urban, as in, the case of other Indian States and British Provinces where the discretion afore• said• ,has very often been used to show a fair number of urban places in, their jurisdiction. '
63. Growth of Urban Population.-Of the total popujation of 5,00,274' persons, the urban population claims l,52,6090r 30'5 per cent. ~f the..latter, the City .. of Bhavnagar alone claims 75,594 or 15 per cent., the remaining 77,015 .or 16 per cent. being distributed among the towns' of Mahuva, Savar-Kundla, Botad,. Sihor, Rajula. Gadhada, Talaja, Lilia and Umrala. All these. with the exception of Rajula f~rm the seats ofyahivatdar's kacheri. The figures on the margin
But the• total increase in the urban popa. lation itself during the past decade amounts to 22 per cent, The urban . .. . population in 1881 was 1,07,396 over which the present population sh~ws. an increase of 42 per cent. during the last fifty years, The margmal table gIVes . the percentages of the urban population to the total since 1881, It has gone from 107396 in 1881 to 1 52609 in 1931; and its percentage to the total has. , , , , risen during that period from 26'8 t() 30'S~
them will make this point clear, It will be also observed that the present Census spasses all the Censuses that have been hitherto taken, in that it has not only got the highest number of persons classed as urban but that the percentage of the urban popula •tion to the total is also the 'highest, In 1901, the urban population formed 30'2 per cent, of the total, But from this no sudden improvement in the process of urbanization should be inferred during the decade 1891- 1901. The higher percentage in 1901 was due to the Immigration. of the people from villages to Mahal head'quarters for famine relief during the fa mine of 1900,as the acuteness of the disaster had forced the people in rural' areas to leave their native villages and flock to towns. On the whole, compared to other Indian States and British India, there is Though the 3£tuaI numbers of the urban population have varied but little from 1891 to 1921, the percentages of the urban to the total population recorded at each successive Census show appreciable variations. The marginal diagram which shows the percentage of urban population to the total by bars of proportionate length with the figures of actual population written in.
a very high degree of urbanization In this State, While the percentage of urban;: population of India as a whole has increased a little from 10'2 in 1921 to 11 atthe current Census, that of the Bombay Presidency which registered the highest degree of urbanity (22'9 per cent.) a decade ago has slightly dropped. down to. 21'2. But the State of ~h~vnagar ~ 30'S per cent. of its .present population. shown as urban, The Similar proportion for the States compnsedinthe Western India States Agency comes to 22'1. . '. ... –
64. T ypea of To~-Before tne various types of towns are distinguished..
it IS necessary to pomt out that SaYar Samapadar and Kundla which forthe
purposes of the Imperia! Tables have been treated separately ~ pursuance
'of the past practice, have for the purposes of this chapter ,been treated as -one town under the name of Savar-Kundla. It will be remembered that both of them have a municipality in common, and are situated one below the other_ The river Na vii which runs between these two places, and seems to separate them, "l"eally serves as a link between them in the form of a bazaar which is held in its dry river bed. The people of both the places lead a common social and economic life. And as one has merged into the other, and produced one homoaen_ -eous town, it will be hardly fair to treat them as two separate and independent urban centres. If an attempt be made to classify the towns according to the main factors to 'Which they owe their urbanity, the towns of the State may" be roughly divided
- into (J) industrial and commercial towns, (iJ) market towns and railway centres,
!iii) old established towns, (iv) temple towns, and (v) agricultural towns. The marginal table shows the number and population of each of the various types of towns. It also gives the proportion per cent. and the average population of each type. The City of Bhavnagar with its growing trade and commerce is
decidedly a rising industrial and commercial centre. It claims 50 per cent. of the total urban population of the State. Mahuva, SavarKundla, and Botad owe their position, among other things, mainly to their be. ing railway centres, and market places. Among the old established urban towns should be included Sihor, Umrala, and Rajula; whereas Gadhada with the temple of Swaminarayan, and Talaja with the Jain temples are the temple towns noted for their being centres of pilgrimage. Lilia has no such relieving feature as the others mentioned above. It is agricultural, and would not have merited the position of a town but for its having a municipality and being the head-quarters of .a Mahal. The average population of a town comes to 15,261, and is exceeded -only by the industrial and commercial centre of Bhavnagar and the market town of Mahuva. In alIiance with the City which has 50 per cent. of the urban popula. tion, the towns of Mahuva, Savar-Kundla and Botad alone claim 1,21,170 or 80 "per cent. of the total urban population. Thus the major portion of the urban population lives in commercial and market towns. Amongst the old established towns, Sihor is prominent and without it the average of this class would have been ~onsiderably reduced. Their share amounts to 19,406 or 13 per cent. The temple and the agricultural towns contribute but very little, their respective quota being only 6 and 1 per cent. of the urban population of the State. The types as defined above represent only the salient feature of the urban life of that particular group. It is only representative and by no means pure and unalloyed. For, Bhavnagar ,City which is a commercial centre is also a great centre of railway. Mahuva, Savar-Kundla, and Botad which are market towns and railway centres, and the temple town of Talaja are also in a way old established towns. Sihor, over and above its being an old town, is also a railway centre; and so are all the rest. It need hardly be added that it is the main characteristic whicl1 is marked and im. portant that is emphasized.
65. Towns classified by Population.-Imperial Tables III and IV should be referred to for the absolute figures of towns falling under different population classes, as also for the figures of variation since 1881. Percentage variation will be found in the following Subsidiary Table.
There is no town in the State having a population of 1,00,000 and over. In. the second class with a population ranging between 50,000 and 1,00,000 falls City of Bhavnagar with a popUlation of 75,594. . The City' will ?e considered i?detail at its proper place, and so only a paSSIng reference Will be made to It wherever necessary. The'absence of any place in the third class with a population between 20,000 and 50,000 discloses the lack of towns of middle size. This. phenomenon is common to the whole ofIndia. At the top, there are a few industrial and commercial cities like Bombay and Calcutta, some medium sized towns in the• middle and a large number of agricultural and rural villages at the bottom. There, are 4 towns with a population between 10,000 and 20,000. These are Mahuva, Savar-Kundla, Botad, and Sihor. They claim 36.5 per cent. of the total urban population of the State. This class seems to have suffered a decline in its population for 20 years since 1891. But it has more than regained its former position within the last ten years when it seems to have progressed with redoubled energy, and shows an increase of 17'4 per cent. During the last five decennia, this class has increased by 35 per cent. The fifth class having population between 5,000 and 10,000 has showed continued progress except during• the unhappy decade 1891-1901. It has got two places and its increase during the past decennuim is as great as 24 per cent. This class represents only 7'6 per cent. of the total urban population. The last urban class with places having less than 5,000 has three towns, and claims only 6'4 per cent. of the town-dwelling population. Though losses in the population of this class between 1901-11 and 1911-21 are fairly high amounting respectively to 7 and 10 per cent., it has not been backward in making them up during the past decade which records an increase of 20'3 per cent. upon the numbers of 1921. During the past fifty years its gains amount to 33 per cent. But according to its present classification as compared with the correspondinO" total in 1881, the increase registered is 15 per cent. It indicates that durina th~ past five decennia much of the population of this class has been lost to the hlgherclasses The net progress of the urban population as a whole, as also of each of the population classes is indeed very striking~ Since 1881, though the. population in
the towns has risen by 42 per cent., the total number of places classed as urban has
remained stationary. The percentage of increase indicates the growing nature of
those towns which are thriving for various reasons. The growth of the urban
population of the State 'represents the growth of the towns of Mahal head-quar.
ters and the greatest quota is contributed by the capital. Growth of commerce
due to the prosperity of the Port of Bhavnagar, extension of railway communica.
tions, and the development of market centres like Botad and Kundla are the chief
causes of the increase in the urban popul<\tion of the State. Since 1891, it has
shown a slight but continuous decrease upto 1921. During the decennium 1901-
1911 which registered an increase of 6'9 in the total population, the decrease recor.
ded in the urban population was '03 per cent. It was the last decade alone which
favoured a great. percentage increase amounting to 22'6 per cent. For thirty
years from 1891.1921, the occupations in towns do not appear to be attractive
. enough to draw the inhabitants of villages to urban areas, and there seems to have
been no appreciable development of the urban occupations during this period.
The rerriarkable commercial development during 1921-31is reflected in the growth
• of the town•dwelling population. The rise which is abrupt and sudden is spread
• over all the classes of population. Such a wide and varied expansion in the urban
population of this State has never heen observed before. The tendency of the
• urban population to live and flourish in larger and growing towns will be noticed
from the fact that 86 per cent. of the urban population live in towns with popula•
tion above 10,000.
66. Progressive Towns.-Having considered the variation and distri.
,bution of the population in towns, those among them which are exhibiting
'progressive tendencies will now be marked out. Among them Botad, Savar.
Kundla, Lilia, Rajula, and Mahuva are the most important. The growth of
the City will be separately surveyed.
