IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 930 of 2001 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 27-02-2001 in WP NO: 9744 of 1997 on the file of the High Court.) Between: The Vice-Chairman, Tirupathi Urban Development Authority, Tirupathi, Chittoor District ..... APPELLANT AND 1. The Secretary to Govt., State of A.P., Finance & Planning Dept., Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.K.Bathi Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING Counsel for respondent No.2 : Ganta Rama Rao Counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 7: P.Raghavendar Reddy The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFULPURKAR W.A.No.930 of 2001 Judgment: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.GOPAL REDDY) Tirupathi Urban Development Authority ﬁled this appeal assailing the correctness of the order passed by the learned single Judge dated 27-02-2001 in allowing W.P.No.9744 of 1997 directing the respondents therein to regularize the services of the petitioners 2 to 5 with effect from 25-11-1993 and the services of the 1st petitioner from the date on which he completed five years of service, subject to rule of reservation, without insisting for existence of clear vacancies as required under G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22-04-1994. The writ appeal was filed on the ground that the High Court will not have jurisdiction since the matter is relating to service; at the ﬁrst instance they have to approach the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal for necessary redressal instead of approaching this court. Learned counsel for the appellant fairly conceded that no notification as contemplated under Section 5(2) of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal Act has been issued conferring jurisdiction to the A.P.A.T. It is not in dispute that the writ petitioners are having continuous service for a minimum period of 5 years as on the cut oﬀ date; therefore, they are also entitled to regularization as per Act 27/1998. In view of the same, no infirmity is discernable in the order passed by the learned single Judge ordering regularization of services. Writ appeal fails and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. ____________________ VILAS V.AFULPURKAR,J. 20-10-2008 Murthy ........REGISTRAR //True Copy// Section Officer To 1. The Secretary to Govt., State of A.P., Finance & Planning Dept., Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others. 2. The Special Officer, & Director of Municipal Administration, MCH, MCH Complex, IV Floor, Hyderabad 3. 2 CD copies