Just what it says. Without the Indian Mutiny to bring it's rule to an end, how long Does the British East India Company continue to rule the Subcontinent?
Well, they didn't really rule it before the Mutiny.
Technically, it was ruled by either the Mogul Emperor or by sovereign princes. The HEIC only collected the revenues.
In reality, the appearance of rule was through John Company. But ever since Pitt's Act the reality of rule had been in the British Parliament.
How long , barring Mutiny , could the Hon company maintain a façade of control? Probably quite a long time. The Brits were never keen to abolish anything just because it was long irrelevant. So, it might still be there , in name, until Independence. Whenever that might be.
ObWI: A more interesting question, is what the effect would be on the Independent Princes of no Mutiny. Particularly the Marathas.
I like the idea of there being an East India Company range of department stores. À la Hudson's Bay.How long , barring Mutiny , could the Hon company maintain a façade of control? Probably quite a long time. The Brits were never keen to abolish anything just because it was long irrelevant. So, it might still be there , in name, until Independence. Whenever that might be.