Edited and
translated by Ramhari Timalsina
Created: 2025-07-09;
Last modified: 2026-02-19
For the metadata of the document, click here
[1r]
1श्री\127४८1श्री३सर्कार[1r]
127
481
Śrī 3 Sarkāra --- 1
Śrī Jaṅgananda Prakāśeśvara --- 2
Hail! A purjī from Commander-in-Chief General Sir Bhīma Śamśera Jaṅga Bahādura Rāṇā, KCVO, who is a prince born of a prince, to the chief and clerks of the Guṭhī Kharca Aḍḍā under -1- (i.e. Śrī 3 Sarkāra)2
Uprānta: “By the grace of [Śrī 3] Sarkāra, as both the daily food supplies (sīdhā and haṇḍī) were granted to me (i.e., Ratnagiri) by the -2- (i.e., Srī Jaṅgananda Prakāśeśvara)3 guṭhī, I departed to undertake a pilgrimage to the three dhāmas on the 20th of Mārga in the year 1969 [Vikrama Saṃvat].4
“By the power and virtue of [Śrī 3] Sarkāra, having completed the journey to the three dhāmas, I returned and presented myself at the place (i.e., Kālamocana) on the 20th of Phālguṇa in the year 1969.
“When I went to the Guṭhī Kharca Aḍḍā under -1- (i.e. Śrī 3 Sarkāra)5 to request the sīdhā and haṇḍī that had been granted to me, I was informed that the hāṇḍī distribution had been stopped and it was therefore not provided.
"Since I returned [late] after [both] celebrating the victory of [Śrī 3] Sarkāra and completing the pilgrimage to the three dhāmas, I have not been able to receive the sīdhā and hāṇḍī starting from the 1st of Mārga in the year 1969. Therefore, if you could issue a sanada in the name of the Guṭhī Kharca Aḍḍā under -1- (i.e. Śrī 3 Sarkāra),6 requesting the restoration of the sīdhā and haṇḍī, I would be able to receive it."
[All this] came to our notice when Ratnagiri Bābājī, residing at Kālamocana, submitted a petition stating [the above]. Therefore, we have restored both the daily sīdhā and haṇḍī which are listed in the name of the said Ratnagiri Bābājī. Hand over the both sīdhā and hāṇḍī for 4 months—from the 1st of Mārga to the end of Phālguṇa—[recorded] as a single [allotment], and from the 1st of Caitra onwards [as] on a daily basis, following the regulations mentioned in the Ain and savālas of your (lit. this) office, to the said Ratnagiri Bābājī.
This amount will be deducted when accounts are cleared according to the account books bearing the signatures and seals of the said person.
Monday, the 12th day (gate) of Caitra in the [Vikrama] era year 1969 (1913 CE).
Auspiciousness.
Attesting that the copy is true to the original: Kharadāra (text: ṣa[radāra]) Bhava Prasāda Arjyāla. Scribe: Śerabahādura. Signature —
This administrative document offers a compact yet revealing insight into early-20th-century governance in Rāṇā-era Nepal, highlighting the interweaving of spiritual authority, state patronage and legal-bureaucratic mechanisms. Despite the centralized and hierarchical nature of the regime, the successful petition of Ratnagiri Bābājī, a religious ascetic receiving state-provided sīdhā and haṇḍī, demonstrates the permeability of authority, where ritual merit, personal appeal and religious status could influence administrative decisions. The reinstatement of his allowance following a formal petition reflects the institutionalized role of ascetics within the state’s religious policy and illustrates a moral economy in which dharma and statecraft were closely linked. This strategic patronage also reinforced regime legitimacy by aligning royal authority with religious values.
The purjī, authorizing four months of backdated provisions and the resumption of daily distributions, signals the existence of formalized record-keeping, fiscal discipline and a credit-based reimbursement model typical of patriarchal bureaucracies. The document exemplifies a quasi-legalistic style of governance, under which individual petitions could prompt official decrees, thereby integrating personal agency within an ostensibly autocratic framework. More than a mere bureaucratic record, this text serves as a lens into the administrative ethos of the Rāṇās, revealing a selective but significant form of state-sponsored religious welfare. It underscores the symbiotic relationship between religion and governance, wherein bureaucratic procedures were tailored to the state’s moral and ritual obligations.