THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.LAKSHMANA REDDY WRIT APPEAL No.1991 OF 1999 Dt: 02.08.2005 Between: Sri Vinayaka Yuvajana Seva Sangham (Regd.) Rep.by its President Sri K.Devadas and others … APPELLANTS AND Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam Rep.by its Executive Officer, Tirupathi and others … RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.LAKSHMANA REDDY WRIT APPEAL No.1991 OF 1999 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Smt.Justice T.Meena Kumari) The present Writ Appeal is filed by the appellants-writ petitioners aggrieved by the Order, dated 08.10.1999, in Writ Petition No.10906 of 1994 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court. The said Writ Petition was filed to direct the respondents to provide employment to all 355 displaced persons of Chandrababu Thota and Perindevi Thota as volunteers with all consequential and attendant benefits. The learned single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition following the Order, dated 08.10.1999, passed in Writ Petition No.5041 of 1996. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Appeal has been preferred. Since the appellants-writ petitioners are 239 in number, this Court, by Order dated 12.07.2005 directed the learned counsel for the appellants-writ petitioners to pay the Court fee, but, the same has not been complied with. The Office has put up a Note on 29.07.2005, stating that the appellants have not paid the Court fee and the same is placed before us for passing appropriate orders. Today, Sri Venkatarama Sarma, learned counsel representing Sri P.B.Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants are not in a position to pay the Court fee as they are displaced persons. We have also had an occasion to go through the Order passed in W.P.No.5041 of 1996 dated 08.10.1999, wherein the learned single Judge has observed that the petitioners therein are all hawkers on Tirumala and some of them are doing business even without any valid licence from the Devasthanam and that at the time of demolition of some structures for widening of the road, none of the petitioners have lost their properties in their occupation. The learned single Judge has also observed that TTD never made any promise whatsoever to any one of the petitioners to consider their cases for appointment into the services of the Devasthanam and that the petitioners cannot be said to be land oustees as they have not lost any of their property. Having observed so, the learned Judge dismissed the Writ Petition. In view of the cogent and convincing reasons given by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.5041 of 1996 dated 08.10.1999, we do not find any reason to interfere with the Order of the learned single Judge. The Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. (T.MEENA KUMARI, J) (P.LAKSHMANA REDDY, J) Dt: 02.08.2005 bsv/lvl