ORDER:

The civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order, dated 04.07.2022 passed in I.A.No.316 of 2021 in Ele.O.P.No.91 of 2021.

2. I.A. which was filed by respondent No.1 herein, under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC read with Rule 28 of Civil Rules of Practice seeking permission to amend the name of respondent No.2 as ‘Vidhya Sagar’ in the place of Durga Prasad, by deleting Durga Prasad, in the short and long cause title, as well as in the affidavit and to make necessary consequential amendment, was allowed.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner and respondent No.1 are residents of Govindapuram (V), Bairupalle Gram Panchayat, V. Kota Mandal, Chittoor District contested for the office of Sarpanch as per the notification. Nominations were submitted to Returning Officer, Stage-I. At the time of notification of nominations, respondent No.1 herein brought to the notice of respondent Nos.2 to 5 that respondent No.1 is having three children and submitted relevant material. Respondent No.2 herein received the material, but no action was initiated. Therefore, respondent No.1 herein filed election O.P. under Section 19(3) and Section 22 and 22(A) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Act, 1994. While arraying the parties in the election O.P., the name of respondent No.2 is shown as Durga Prasad, A.E. Panchayath Raj Department, Baireddy Palle Mandal, Chittoor District, Returning Officer Stage-I Bairupalle Gram Panchayat, V. Kota Mandal, Chittoor District.

4. Petitioner herein filed counter in the election O.P. and inter alia contended that election petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. The Executive Officer/Personal Secretary and District Panchayat Officer are proper and necessary parties for an application under Section 22 of Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and on that ground alone, petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Respondent No.3 herein filed counter and inter alia contended that as per records and proceedings one Sri C. Vidhya Sagar who is working as A.E.E., Panchayat Raj Engineering Department was appointed as a Returning Officer (Stage-I) for the Pamugani palle, Peddabharinepalle, Kongatam and Bairupalle Gramapanchayat Elections of V.Kota Mandalam vide proceedings in ROC No.640/2019A1(Pts), dated

26.01.2021.

6. Pending the election O.P., respondent No.1 filed I.A.No.316 of 2021 to amend the name of respondent No.2 as Vidhya Sagar by deleting the name of Durga Prasad in the short and long cause title as well as in the affidavit and to make necessary consequential amendments, if any. In the affidavit filed in support of said petition, it was contended inter alia that petition was adjourned for notice to respondent No.2 on payment of process and process was paid twice or thrice but notice was not served on respondent No.2. On enquiry as to whether respondent No.2 is working in the office to which notice was sent, she came to know that said Returning Officer Stage-I, Bairupalle Gram Panchayath is Vidhya Sagar, but not Durga Prasad as mentioned in the cause title. The said mistake took place due to oversight and hence, the petition seeking amendment was filed.

7. Petitioner filed counter and contended inter alia that respondent No.2 is not concerned with the election O.P. and it is bad for misjoinder. The proposed amendment will have effect of taking away the important admissions made in the petition by the petitioner and prayed to dismiss the petition.

8. The lower Court by order, dated 04.07.2022 allowed the application against which the present revision is filed.

9. Heard Smt. Y. Mahalakshmi, learned counsel representing Sri K. Raghu Veer, learned counsel for the petitioner.

10. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that application was filed after completion of pleadings and respondent No.1 has not given proper address of the person, except showing the name of the person as Vidya Sagar which is to be replaced with the name of Durga Prasad. She