An appeal under election law cannot be converted into a valid election petition unless it complies with mandatory requirements of security deposit and verification.

ORDER

1. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 9.11.2022 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Revenue, Shahpur District Betul, whereby learned Sub Divisional Officer allowed the application filed under Order 6 rule 17 of the CPC and permitted the respondent to carry out the amendment in the appeal preferred by the respondent under section 91 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1993').

2. The short facts of the case are that the petitioner and the respondent contested for the post of Panch for Ward No.16 of Gram Panchayat, Chopana, DistrictBetul. On 14.7.2022, Returning Officer declared the petitioner as elected and issued a certificate in favour of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the election of the petitioner, the respondent filed an appeal under Section 91 of the Act, 1993 assailing the certificate dated 14.7.2022 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Shahpur on 21.7.2022. After appearance, petitioner raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal under Section 91 of the Act, 1993 and consequently, an application was moved on behalf of the respondent on 30.8.2022 under Order 6 rule 17 of the CPC for correcting the cause title of the appeal by inserting the words 'election petition' in place of 'appeal' and mentioning ' Section 122 ' in place of ' Section 91 of the Act,1993' as well as replacing the word 'appellant' by 'petitioner' and 'non-appellant' by 'respondent'. The application was opposed by petitioner on the ground that the proposed amendment will change the nature of the lis and an appeal filed under Section 91 of the Act, 1993 cannot be converted into an election petition under Section 122 of the Act. Learned Sub Divisional Officer by order dated 09.11.2022 allowed the application filed under Order 6 rule 17 of the CPC considering the explanation given by the respondent that the mistake occurred due to typographical error and inadvertence. Being aggrieved by the order of allowing the application under Order 6 rule 17 of the CPC by which the permission was granted to convert the appeal filed under Section 91 of the Act, 1993 into an election petition under Section 122 of the Act, 1993, the present petition has been preferred.

3. With the consent of parties, the matter is heard finally for the purpose of final disposal of the petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an election petition can be filed under section 122 of the Act, 1993 and in accordance with rule 3 of M.P. Panchayat (Election Petitions Corrupt Practices & Disqualification For Membership) Rules 1995. He further submits that as per rule 7 of the rules, 1995 at the time of presentation of election petition, the petitioner is under obligation to deposit a sum of Rs.500/- as security with the specified officer and until and unless amount is deposited, no election petition can be entertained. He further submits that where no security deposit was accompanied with the election petition, the petition cannot be entertained and same is liable to be dismissed under rule 8, which provides that if the provisions of rules 3, 4 or 7 are not complied with, the petition shall be dismissed by the specified officer. It is not in dispute that along with the appeal filed under section 91 of the Act, 1993, no amount was deposited as security amount and even along with the amendment application, it was not offered by the respondent to deposit the security amount therefore, in the absence of deposition of security amount, no election petition can be entertained and the same was liable to be dismissed according to the rule 8 of the rules, 1995. When no amount as