IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 1216 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 11/03/2004 in WP NO : 22441 OF 2000 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, Tirupathi, Chittoor District, Rep. by its Executive Officer, Ajeya Kallam, I.A.S., 2 The Principal, S.P.W. Polytechnic, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. ..... APPELLANT(S) AND 1 A. Kannaiah, S/o. Kuppaiah, R/o. Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 2 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endts-III) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellants: MR A.K.JAYAPRAKASH RAO Counsel for respondent No.1: Mr V.Jagapathi Counsel for respondent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Bilal Nazki) This appeal has been filed challenging the order of the learned single Judge in writ petition No.22441 of 2000. There was a dispute with regard to the 1st respondent’s absorption into service on the ground of his long tenure with Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the 1st respondent had never been in service of TTD and therefore there was no question of his regularization. It appears that there were two persons who filed writ petitions. One person was petitioner in writ petition No.5162 of 2001. Directions were given by this Court and the said judgment was challenged by way of an appeal and in appeal being writ appeal No.2234 of 2003, the judgment of the learned single judge was confirmed. Both the cases are on similar footing. In view of this background the learned single Judge noted thus: “Learned counsel for the respective parties agreed that in view of the confirmation of the judgment in W.P.No.5162 of 2001 in W.A.No.2234 of 2003, the relief sought herein could be granted in terms of the judgment in W.P. No.5162 of 2001.” Thereafter the learned single Judge passed the order accordingly. Now the order leaves no room to doubt that the order passed by the learned single Judge is an agreed order. Once an agreed order is passed by the learned single Judge, we fail to understand how the present appellants could file this appeal. Appeal is not maintainable. It is accordingly dismissed. ___________________ BILAL NAZKI, J ___________________ S.ANANDA REDDY, J 10th August, 2004. nmr DEPUTY REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1 Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, Tirupathi, Chittoor District, 2 The Principal, S.P.W. Polytechnic, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3 The Principal Secretary,Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Endts-III) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 4 GP for Labour, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (OUT) 5 2 CD copies.