A Civil Revision under Section 115 of the CPC is not maintainable against an order passed by a Specified Officer in an election petition under the C.G. Panchayati Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, as the Act and Rules constitute a complete code, making such orders challengeable only under Article 226 of the Constitution.

1. This Civil Revision has been filed against the order dated 21.07.2025 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Mungeli District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh whereby application preferred by the Non-applicant No.1/applicant herein under Order 7 Rule 11 Civil Procedure Code¹1 CPC has been dismissed and the petitioner/Respondent No.3 herein was directed to implead party in accordance with law as also order dated 30.07.2025 by way of which, petitioner/Respondent No.3 herein impleaded Respondent No.4 namely Nakul Kurre as party to the election petition.

2. Applicant way of this Civil Revision has prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to allow this instant civil revision & quash the order dated 21.07.2025 & 30.07.2025 & entire proceedings in Case No. A-89(21)/202503250100043, Ashok Kumar Patre Vs Narendra Kumar Banjara & allow the application under order 7 rule 11 CPC filed by the petitioner, in the interest of justice and any other relief/reliefs, which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also please be granted to the petitioner.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 17.02.2025, respondent no.3 contested the election for the post of Sarpanch at Gram Panchayat Jhaliyapur, Janpad Panchayat Mungeli, District Mungeli, CG, having election symbol "Chasma Chaap". The Applicant & respondent no. 3 contested the election for the post of Sarpanch. The applicant won the election for the post of Sarpanch at Gram Panchayat Jhaliyapur. Respondent no. 3 filed an election petition on 11.03.2025 before the SDO(Revenue), Mungeli District Mungeli C.G., stating that the election for the post of Sarpanch was concluded on 17.02.2025, in which he also contested & after the counting of votes, the applicant received 458 votes & the respondent no.3 also received 458 votes & the applicant was declared as the winning candidate. It was also averted in the petition that nearly 18 ballot papers which was in favour of the respondent no. 3 has been rejected by the respondent no. 1 & 2, in an illegal manner & hence, the respondent no. 3 filed an application before the SDO (Revenue) for recounting of the votes on 21.02.2025, in which no action has been taken by the said Authority. It was also mentioned in the petition that the applicant & respondent no. 3 has received equal number of votes & on the basis of lottery system, the applicant was declared winner. It was also averred in the petition that the respondent no. 3 had earlier preferred a writ petition registered as WPC No. 1276/2025, Ashok Kumar Patre Vs CG State Election Commission, in which this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 07.03.2025, has ordered the SDO (Revenue), Mungeli to decide the application in accordance with law & hence, the respondent no.3 filed an election petition under section 122 of CG Panchayati Raj Adhiniyam for recounting of the votes at Polling Booth No. 298 Jhaliyapur & Polling Booth No. 299 Achankapur. SDO (Revenue), registered the same as Case No. A-89(21)/202503250100043 & notices were issued. Respondent no. 1 submitted its reply to the application denying the contentions of the respondent no.3. On 29.05.2025, the applicant filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, stating that the respondent no. 4 Nakul Kurrey, has also contested the election for the post of Sarpanch, but has not been made a party to the election petition, who is a necessary party to the Election Petition, hence, the Election Petition ought to be dismissed, as Rule 4 of the CG Panchayats (Election Petiti