Navin Sinha, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner, learned Counsel for the official Respondents and learned Counsel appearing for private Respondents 6 and 7. Elections were held to the Zila Parishad, Supaul in the Municipal Constituency No. 22 comprising of seven Panchayats on 2nd June, 2006. The Petitioner was declared to be the wining candidate and statutory declaration was made. Respondent No. 6, who had also contested the election with the Petitioner, then filed Election Petition No.2 of 2006 in the Court of Sub-Judge I, Supaul questioning the winning declaration of the Petitioner.

2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the relief sought in the election petition, at Annexure-5 to the Writ Petition, was for a declaration that the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 6 was duly elected by receiving majority of valid votes and for a declaration that the election of the returned candidate/Petitioner was void. in terms of the relief sought, it was necessary for the Plaintiff-Respondent No. 6 to implead all the contesting candidates in the election fray as party Defendants. He relied upon Section 137(2) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act read with Rule 106(2) of the