Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 10.11.2004 (Annexure – 4) passed by the respondent No. – 1 i.e. Revisional Authority in S. A. R. Revision No. – 179 of 1998, whereby the Revision application has been allowed and the original order passed by special officer dated 26.06.1989 and the appellate order passed by appellate authority dated 09.10.1998 i.e. respondent Nos. 3 and 2 respectively have been set aside.

3. In this case earlier Respondent No. – 4 filed an application before the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi claiming restoration of the lands Comprised within R. S. Plot No. – 1272 (57 Decimals), 1273 (5 Decimals) and 1274 (55 Decimals) under Khata No. – 93 of Mouja – Morabadi, P. S. No. – 192 District – Ranchi and on the basis of the said application a S. A. R. Case No. – 108 / 87 – 88 was registered in the court of the Special Officer, Scheduled Area Regulation. The learned S.A.R officer by terms of judgment dated 26-06-1989 rejected the restoration application on the ground that the provisions of the Act were not applicable, to the land which has been converted into Chapperbandi by terms of registered sale deed dated 10-10-1947.

The Respondent No. 4 preferred S.A.R Appeal No. 9 R 15/89-90 before the Additional Collector Ranchi challenging the order dated 26-06-89 and The Learned Additional Collector in terms of judgment dated 09-10-1998 dismissed the Appeal mainly on three grounds firstly on the ground that the land had been converted into chapperbandi land by way of registered sale deed dated 10.10.1947, therefore the provisions of section 71A of the CNT, Act was not applicable, secondly, on the ground that the restoration application was barred by limitation and thirdly, on the ground that on 27-09-1946, the date of transfer of the land , there was no restriction in so far as transfer inter se Schedule Tribes are concerned therefore there was no question of violation of the provisions of the Act.

Against the order passed by the Additional Collector, the Respondent No. – 4 preferred S. A. R. Revision No. – 179 / 98 before the Respondent No. – 1, and the Respondent No. – 1 in terms of order dated 10.11.2004 allowed the Revision Application and ordered for restoration of the land by setting aside the orders of the Special Officer dated 26.06.89 and the Additional Collector dated 09.10.98.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has raised mainly three points. The first point is in respect of the transfer of land by recorded raiyat to other tribal and in this context he submitted that the land in question was transferred to a tribal one Alfes Kujur, son of Pande Kujur by virtue of registered Sale Deed No. 6231 dated 27.09.1946 i.e prior to 1947 therefore the embargo put by the Amending Act 1947 which provides for taking prior permission of Deputy Commissioner before any transfer shall not apply to the present case. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner referred to and relied upon the decision rendered in Patras Oraon Vs. State of Bihar and Ors. Reported in (1991) 2 BLJR 1084 and submitted that in a case where both the parties are Schedule Tribe and the transaction was made in the year 1944 therefore the embargo put by the Amending Act, 1947 shall not apply because the same was not given retrospective effect.

By referring the above judgment the learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that the revisional authority has failed to appreciate and consider this question of law in its proper perspective. It is further submitted that competent authority as well as appellate authority have decided the issue in favour of the petitioners but the revisional authority has failed to appreciate this point of law and thereby committed an error in allowing the revision application.

5. The another point raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is in respect of applicability of Sectio