JUDGMENT : L. Rath, J. - This petition is at the instance of a lady belonging to the Scheduled tribe for restoration of the order passed by the Special Officer under the Orissa Scheduled Areas Transfer of Immoveable property (By Scheduled Tribes) Regulations, 1956 (for short, the 'Regulations') in her favour reversed in appeal. 2. The brief facts are that the Petitioner filed an application under the Regulations to set aside the impugned sale in favour of the opposite parties who are non-tribal. The application was contested contending that the Petitioner had ceased to be a member of the Scheduled tribe on account of her marriage with a non-tribal Kangali Mohapatra and that she had also described herself as of Khandayat caste in the sale deeds. In the proceeding the Petitioner also took the stand, in view of the objection of the opposite parties, that she is not the married wife but the concubine of Kangali Mohapatra. While the Special Officer held the sale to be null and void, the Additional District Magistrate held in appeal that the Petitioner was estoppel from claiming herself as a Scheduled tribe lady entitled to protection under the Regulations, she having led the opposite parties to believe her caste as Khandayat describing herself as such in the sale deed and further held relying upon the provisions of the explanation to Clause 3(1) of the Regulations that it having provided the purchase of land by a tribal lady married to a nontrivial person from a tribal to be deemed as purchase by a non-tribal, that sale of land by a tribal lady after her marriage to a non-tribal no longer enjoyed the protection of the Regulations so as to declare the sale invalid. 3. Both the points on which the appellate order rests are not sustainable. 50 far as the position u/s 115 of the Evidence Act is concerned, if the sale was made in vitiating of the provisions of the Regulations, a plea of estoppel would not be available in defence as there is no estoppel against the statute. Besides merely because, a statement has been made in the sale deed, it would not amount to an admission on the part of the vendor lady since it is not on record that the statement was to her knowledge and that she had understood the import d such mention in the sale deed. Besides merely because, a statement has been made in the sale deed, it would not amount to an admission on the part of the vendor lady since it is not on record that the statement was to her knowledge and that she had understood the import d such mention in the sale deed. Besides at any rate, a mere dentitions in the sale deed would also not change her caste. So far as the explanation is concerned, it may be extracted: Explanation-For the purpose of this Sub-section a transfer of immoveable property in favour of a female member of a Scheduled tribe who is married to a person who does not belong to any Scheduled tribe shall be deemed to be a transfer made in favour of a person not belonging to a Scheduled tribe. The explanation, inserted by way of amendment in 1977 is apparently for the purpose of safe-guarding against exploitation of tribals by persons belonging to other communities by marriage to tribal women which comes handy. For the purpose, the purchase of land by a scheduled' tribe woman from another Scheduled tribe effected after her marriage outside the Scheduled tribe communities has to be treated under the deeming provisions of the statute as purchase by a non-scheduled tribe person and hence hit by the provisions of the Regulations. The same is not the case so far as transfer of land by a Scheduled tribe lady after her marriage to a non-tribal is concerned. The mere marriage, without anything more, does not ipso facto change her status of being a member of the Scheduled tribe. In Chatturbhuj Vithaldas Jasani Vs. Moreshwar Parashram and Others, dealing with a case if conversion of a Scheduled caste to Mahanubhava Panth, the Supreme Court held that what is to be determined is the social and political consequences of such conversions. In that case conclusion was reached that the conversion had little meaning beyond an intellectual acceptance of certain ideological tenets and did not alter the convert's caste status. It was also held in AIR 1359 S.C. 1318 V.V. Giri v. D. Suri Dora and Ors. In that case conclusion was reached that the conversion had little meaning beyond an intellectual acceptance of certain ideological tenets and did not alter the convert's caste status. It was also held in AIR 1359 S.C. 1318 V.V. Giri v. D. Suri Dora and Ors. that a scheduled cast cannot by his unilateral action change his caste to a higher status and that the cast status of the person in the context will necessity have to be determined in the light of the recognition received by him from the members of the cast e into which he seeks an entry. A similar question was also dealt with in Kartik Oraon Vs. David Munzni and Another, where the Court came to the commission that members of Oraon tribe embracing christianity do not cease to be Oraons and continue to be entitled to the rights and provable of the tribals. Whether change of caste takes place by marriage of a non-scheduled caste lady to a Scheduled caste was considered by the Calcutta High Court in 1985 (1) SLJ 521 N.E. Horo Vs. Smt. Jahanara Jaipal Singh, was explained and distinguished. It was held that marriage does not make any difference as regards caste of a person and that the question also did not arise directly in Jaipal Singh's case which only decided that a non-tribal lady marrying a tribal and accepted by the tribal community becomes a member of the tribe but never held regarding change of her tribe. 4. A submission has been made by Mr. Das, learned Counsel appearing for the opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 that the effect of the explanation carried to its logical conclusion is that the sale and purchase by a lady belonging to the Scheduled tribe after her marriage are treated differently from each other so that while a purchase by her is regarded as one by a non-tribal, the sale is regarded as one by is Scheduled tribe personal. It is thus his submission that the sale by such a woman must be treated also as a sale by a non-tribal person so as to avoid obvious anomaly of reaching inconsistent conclusions. The submission has no substance since the regulation has itself chosen to treat the sale and purchase by such a Scheduled tribe lady differently from each other. It is thus his submission that the sale by such a woman must be treated also as a sale by a non-tribal person so as to avoid obvious anomaly of reaching inconsistent conclusions. The submission has no substance since the regulation has itself chosen to treat the sale and purchase by such a Scheduled tribe lady differently from each other. The underlying purpose in both the cases is the same, namely, to provide protection against exploitation of Scheduled tribe persons. In the case of purchase, the Regulations seem to see thereof the transaction and lift the veil thereof unearthing the real nature of the transaction i.e. purchase by a non-tribal from a Scheduled tribe and in the case of sale, the protection available also to a lady who has married outside the tribe. In both such cases, the paramount object of the Regulations is to avoid inequitable transactions dealing with the land of tribal persons to which they might be drawn into unwittingly. 5. In the result, the order of the learned Additional District Magistrate is quashed as contrary to law and the order of the Special Officer is restored. Hearing fee is assessed at Rs. 100/-. S. C. Mohapatra, J. 6. I agree. Writ Petition allowed. Final Result : Allowed