Option 1: The option suggests that under the Permanent Settlement, the zamindars (landlords) invested capital and enterprise to improve agriculture similar to British yeoman farmers. This option implies that the zamindars took steps to enhance agricultural practices. However, this option is incorrect. The Permanent Settlement did not motivate zamindars to invest in agriculture or make improvements to benefit the rural society.

Option 2: This option states that a group of rich peasants known as jotedars succeeded in consolidating their position in the villages. This option signifies that the jotedars, who were wealthy peasants, gained power and authority in rural areas. This option accurately reflects the outcome of the Permanent Settlement. The jotedars were able to exploit and oppress the ryots (landless peasants) under the system.

Option 3: The option suggests that the ryots (landless peasants) prospered as a result of a fixed revenue levy imposed on them. This option is incorrect. The Permanent Settlement did not lead to the prosperity of the ryots. Instead, it burdened them with heavy taxes and exploitative practices by the zamindars.

Option 4: This option states that the system of Collectorate introduced by the Company for exercising supervisory control on zamindars