JUDGMENT

1. The present Civil Revision Petitions are filed against the common order dtd. 18/5/2023 passed in I.A No.369 of 2023 & I.A.No.368 of 2023 in E.P.No.01 of 2021 on the file of the Special Officer (Election Tribunal)-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ongole (for short "the Election Tribunal").

2. As the issue involved in both the civil revision petitions is one and the same, these matters are taken up together for disposal by this Common Order.

3. The present impugned I.A.No.368 of 2023 and I.A No.369 of 2023 were filed by the petitioner before the Election Tribunal against the respondents under Sec. 151 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 seeking to reopen the matter and to grant permission to open the box which contains the Election material which is under the custody of the Tribunal in the presence of both the parties and their respective counsels to recount in order to ascertain about double casting of the votes, about the casting of the vote belonging to the person who is residing in Foreign country on the date of Election and other malpractices done by the 1st respondent with the support of respondents no.2 to 4.

4. Originally the petitioner filed the main Election OP questioning the Election of the 1st respondent as the Sarpanch of M.Muppalla Village and it was illegally declared that the petitioner was defeated and the 1st respondent was elected in the election with a margin of Two (2) votes. In the Voters list published in M.Muppalla Village, it was noticed that one Talluri Gopi Krishna has three (3) votes in this Panchayat at Sl.Nos.64, 616 and 618 and he casted his vote for twice. Similarly the name of Chinnam Ramya Sri is entered twice in the voters list at Sl.Nos.265 and 1740, and she casted her vote for twice. The daughter-in-law of 1st respondent by name Vykunta/ Maddineni Pavani casted a vote by impersonating the real voter by name Muddana Sujatha @ Vykunta Sujatha, W/o Srinivasa Rao, who is living in Abroad on 9/2/2021 i.e., date of election. After declaration of election by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner and her agents requested for recounting, but they refused. Even as per the final result sheet the calculation is wrong. The evidence of petitioner shows that the said Talluri Gopi Krishna has three (3) votes and he casted two (2) votes, Chinnam Ramya Sri also has two (2) votes and she casted two (2) votes. Further, unless the box contained the election material is opened, it is not possible whether any person casted vote by impersonating the real voter. Similarly, it is not possible to establish about double casting of votes by Chinnam Ramya Sri and Talluri Gopi Krishna. Hence, the present impugned applications were filed before the Election Tribunal. After careful consideration, the same were dismissed on the ground that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief to reopen the Election OP and to grant permission to open the box containing the election material for recounting in order to ascertain about double casting of the votes, about the casting of the vote belonging to the person, who is residing in Foreign Country on the date of election and other malpractices done by the 1st respondent with the support of respondents No.2 to 4 at that stage.

5. Counter affidavit is filed by the 1st respondent in CRP No.1433 of 2023 denying all the allegations made in the petitions. It is stated that, the petitioner and the 1st respondent contested for the post of Sarpanch of Maddirala Muppalla Village in the Panchayat Elections conducted in the year 2021. In the said elections, the 1st respondent herein was declared and elected as Sarpanch of Maddirala Muppalla Village by the voters of the Village with the margin of 2 votes. In view of the little margin and undigesting the defeat, the petitioner herein filed a petition in EOP No.1 of 2021 before the Election Tribunal with false and baseless allegations. Thereafter, the petitioner questioned the very voters list prepared by the Government authorities to conduct