I think Ghandi would support it as he was with the British on the subject until he learnt that the British weren't grateful for the help.
Gandhi by 1916 has seen South Africa and the way that Indians were treated there.
Seriously any POD with British control of India into the late 20th C needs a POD way before 1857. Company mismanagement of India caused the Mutiny and, to be fair, a lot of that stemmed from changing British attitudes. In the late 18th C Company officials generally tended to Indianise, so to speak, being open to adopting Indian customs and marrying Indian wives. Their de jure reason for being there was to govern by license of the Mughal emperor, giving them some legitimacy, enhanced by their relative respect for Indian culture. By the 19th C this had completely changed and Indians were clearly regarded as an inferior race.
Unless this trend can be changed, British rule of India will only serve to create a nationalised elite which will form the spearhead of a movement to liberate India.
To rule India the British need to become Indian. Anything else would (and was) come to be seen as foreign oppression. 1916 is far too late. Unfortunately given the mores and morals of 19th C Europe, Indianisation is impossible. British rule in India depended on keeping the traditional elites (i.e. the aristocracy) coopted. However, this simply meant a generation of Indians educated in England or by English methods who absorbed the 19th C principles of nationalism and applied them at home. The alternative is a far more brutal occupation (instead of the soft exploitation of OTL) which would probably lead to a communist revolution by the mid 20th C.
