Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. H.K. Mahato, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, G.A.-I, Mr. P.P.N. Roy, Sr. Adv., Mr. Pandey Ashok Nath Roy, Adv., Mr. Jitendra Tripathy, Adv.

What is the applicable legal provision for challenging the consent given by the Deputy Commissioner for the transfer of Bhuinhari Pahanai land? What is the time limit for challenging a transfer of Bhuinhari Pahanai land under Section 49(5) of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act? What is the difference in scope between Section 71-A and Section 49(5) of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act regarding the restoration of land?

Key Points: - The appeal challenges the dismissal of a writ petition concerning the restoration of possession of land transferred in contravention of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act (!) (!) . - The land in dispute was Bakashta Bhuinhari Pahanai land, transferred in 1934 (!) . - The original writ petitioner filed a petition under Section 71-A of the Act for restoration of land, which was later converted to a petition under Section 48 (!) (!) (!) . - The transfer was made via a registered deed after seeking permission from the Deputy Commissioner (!) . - The challenge to the transfer was made approximately 45 years after the transfer (!) (!) . - Section 49(5) of the Act provides a remedy for challenging consent given by the Deputy Commissioner for transfer of Bhuinhari Pahanai land within twelve years (!) (!) (!) . - Section 71-A is a general provision for restoration of land unlawfully transferred, while Section 49(5) is a special provision for challenging consent for transfer of occupancy holding or Bhuinhari tenure (!) (!) . - The court held that the challenge to the transfer was not maintainable under Section 71-A due to the time lapse and the applicability of Section 49(5) as a special provision (!) . - The appeal was dismissed, confirming the lower court's decision on the legitimacy of the land transfer and restoration processes (!) (!) . - The court rejected the submission that there is no provision for delivery of possession to a non-tribal, stating that possession must be restored if it was delivered under an illegal order (!) (!) .

What is the applicable legal provision for challenging the consent given by the Deputy Commissioner for the transfer of Bhuinhari Pahanai land?

What is the time limit for challenging a transfer of Bhuinhari Pahanai land under Section 49(5) of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act?

What is the difference in scope between Section 71-A and Section 49(5) of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act regarding the restoration of land?