History of Orissa from the Earliest Times to the British Period v2.c44.44

v2.c44.44

The Board was informed before this date that the late Rājā Dāmodar Bhañja had adopted a son and the Board thought that the right of inheritance to the Qila’ (the entire State of Mayurbhañj) should have devolved on this adopted son. The case was evidently referred to the Governor-General in Council. Dowdeswell, as Secretary to the Government, informed the Board of Revenue on the 3rd March 1812 that the revenue (? tribute) payable by the Mayurbhañj State should be fixed at Rs. 1001 as proposed by the Board on condition of that State relinquishing all claims to the share (6-16th) realised by it from pilgrims to Jagannātha. On the same date E. S. Waring, Collector of Katak, forwarded a petition from Rāṇī Champā Dei, one of the widows left by Dāmodar Bhañja. A copy of this petition is not available to me now but it appears from Waring's letter that Champā Dei had claimed to the succession to the Gadi after Sumitrā Dei. Waring states that after receiving the Board's letter directing him to register the State in the name of its present possessor, both he and Mr. Midford issued proclamations but nobody responded to it. We learn from the same letter that Rāṇī Jamunā Bhañja had also presented a petition which had been forwarded to the Board by him on the 11th July, 1811. Further on Waring states that he has received several petitions from Jamunā Dei (? Champā) and ordered her Wakils to prove their case, who failed to substantiate the claim. They ended by stating that if the State was not to be given to Jamunā (? Champā) Dei then it must revert to the Company. The last paragraph of Waring's letter contains the very valuable information that Trivikram Bhañja, the adopted son of the late Rājā Dāmodar Bhañja, has been in possession of the State for almost two years. This statement proves definitely that the late Mahārājā Kṛṣṇachandra Bhañja was not correct in stating in 1894-95 that Sumitrā Deī was succeeded by Jamunā Deī who ruled from 1810-1813. It is now certain from the records that Trivikram Bhañja succeeded Mahārāṇī Sumitrā Deī in 1810 and Jamunā Deī was only a pretender. Waring writes again a week later to the Secretary to the Board of Revenue stating that he had every reason to believe that the person who appeared before him as the *Wakil* of Rāṇī Champā Deī was an imposter. He thought that interested persons were trying to delay the registration of this case in the name of the present possessor. One of the Rāṇīs of the late Dāmodar Bhañja had sent an acknowledgment acknowledging the present possessor as the lawful heir to the State (letter dated the 10th March, 1812). On receiving this letter the Board ordered Waring to reject the applications of Champā Deī (17th March, 1812). On receiving this letter the Collector reported on the 24th March 1812 that necessary arrangements had been made with Rājā Trivikram Bhañja in accordance with the resolution of the Government. It is therefore clear that Mahārājā Kṛṣṇa Chandra Bhañja’s list of succession of Bhañja kings bassed on State records is wrong. Sumitrā Deī was directly succeeded by Rājā Trivikram Bhañja and Jamunā Deī was a pretender till March 1812 and after that date she could not have exercised any lawful authority. The name of Jamunā Deī as the 39th ruler of the Mayurbhañj State should therefore be deleted.¹