Rulers of Indian states did not have autonomy under the British Rule.
Explanation:
The amount of power the ruler had over his dominion were nominal at best and their royalty was subject to the British as they could cite any reason and annex their land from them.
The amount of power the ruler had was also dependent on how closely the British were involved in their territory.
This was to be seen in places like Delhi and Calcutta where the British influence was more than in fringes like Kerala and Orrissa where the King still had more power.
The power of the ruler was subject to the needs and interference of the British.
Read more on Brainly.com - https://brainly.com/question/15650754#readmore
