Section 22 (5) is for protection of weaker sections 

2)According to Section22 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act previous permission from the Revenue Offi- cer should have been obtained by them before transferring their lands to the respondents. Since this statutory re- quirement has not been met, the transfers are illegal. The suit land must, therefore, be restored to the transferors."

3)in present case land has not been settled on rainstorms by govt but has purchased land in open market 

4) as such permission is not required from revenue officer 

5) however as matter of abundant caution better obtain permission 

As you have rightly pointed out, such restrictions should not apply as the objective of the act is to protect the lands granted to sc/st people. Since, in the instant case, a sc buyer has paid the consideration amount for the land to the sc seller and the land was not grant land.

Section 22 of the OLR Act requires permission of the competent revenue authority for transfer of any land belonging to S.C. or S.T. in favour of a person not belonging to such S.C. or S.T. Sub-Section(1) of Section 22 of OLR.

Act explicitly makes a declaration that any transfer of a holding or part thereof by a S.C. or S.T. to a non-S.C. or non-S.T. shall be void, meaning thereby that the sale shall be invalid ab initio.

However, in Section 12 of the C.P. Tenancy (Orissa Amendment) Act there is no such provision that the sale in contravention of the proviso to Section 12(1)(b) shall be void. The consequence of a transfer in violation of the proviso as aforesaid is envisaged under Sub-section (4) of Section 12, which is to the effect that in a proceeding initiated before the Deputy Commissioner either suo motu or an application of a transferee or his successor-in-interest, the sale can be declared void.

The proviso to sub-section (4) further stipulates that no transfer shall be declared void or such transferee be liable for eviction after expiry of 12 years from the date of his coming into possession of the holder.

Therefore, it is quite evident that a transfer without permission of the competent authority under the proviso to Section 12(1)(b) of the Act does not ipso facto become void unless and until it is so declared in an appropriate proceeding initiated under sub-section (4) of Section 12. In other words, it means that the sale shall continue to be valid unless it is declared void in an appropriate proceeding.

Yes your interpretation and understanding for the eaid law is proper 

Dear Client,

Section 22(5) of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 states that “Where any raiyat or tenant surrenders or abandons his holding or any part thereof without the previous approval of the Revenue Officer and the holding or part thereof so surrendered or abandoned is taken possession of by the landlord, then, it shall be competent for the Revenue Officer (after giving to the landlord an opportunity of being heard) to impose on the landlord a penalty of an amount not exceeding two hundred rupees per acre of the land so surrendered or abandoned for each year or any part thereof during which the possession is continued”.

According to Section 22 of the OLR Act, any land transfer in favor of a person who is not a member of a S.C. or S.T. requires approval from the relevant revenue body. The OLR Act's Sub-Section(1) of Section 22 expressly states that any transfer of a holding, in whole or in part, by a S.C. or S.T. to a non-S.C. or non-S.T. is null and void, effectively rendering the sale null and void from the beginning.