How to analyse the following reviewer comments? How can I improve a paper which has the following comments from the reviewer:

There are missing references to recent literature, which are closely related to this submitted work. A proper comparison of results and the methodologies among these efforts, as well as clear motivation for the incremental progress is typically required.
In addition, the submitted paper has several typographical and organizational errors.

Is the reviewer asking me to cite more references?
What does it mean for a paper to have  &quot;typographical and organizational errors&quot;?
Can someone tell me what is the reviewer asking me to improve?
The decision is &quot;reject&quot;.
Should I resubmit to the same journal after making corrections or to a different one?
These are all fairly clear.


  There are missing references to recent literature, which are closely
  related to this submitted work.


Exactly what it says on the tin. The reviewer believes you are missing references, and importantly, recent references in areas close to what your paper is on. You should find them, and include them. More importantly...


  A proper comparison of results and the methodologies among these
  efforts, as well as clear motivation for the incremental progress is
  typically required.


Your reviewer is asking you to put your paper in research in context with those papers. What does this add? Why did it need to be done. What is the motivation of the work?


  In addition, the submitted paper has several typographical and
  organizational errors.


This, again, means exactly what it says. The reviewer has found what they believe are typographical errors, and errors where the paper isn't well organized - for example, possibly where a section relies on something not yet introduced.


  The decision is "reject".
  
  Should I resubmit to the same journal after making corrections or to a
  different one?


If they wanted you to revise and resubmit, that would have been the decision. A flat "Reject" decision means you will need a new journal, though I would suggest taking the reviewer's comments to heart. It's possible they're correct, and it's possible you'll get the same reviewer again.

To expand a bit on your comments, because replies are a bad place for nuance:


  I have one question? suppose i sent this paper to a lower standard journal and the same reviewer gets hold of the paper, will his/her review change subject to the journal


This is very unlikely. You might get away with it if the primary criticism was about the novelty or importance of the paper, or not fitting with the right audience. But, to be direct, the reviewer's comments are things that would be fatal flaws in most respectable journals - just going down a tier won't fix them. Instead, I'd strongly suggest you mull over the reviewers comments, go looking for the recent studies they mention, etc.