ORDER (M.R. Verma, J. (Retd.) Chairman) - The applicant in this original application has prayed for quashing Annexures A-8 and A-9 whereby the claim of the applicant for grant of benefit of Army Service has been denied. 2.The sum and substance of the case of the applicant is that after having served in the Army the applicant was re-appointed as a Peon against a post which was unreserved and he submitted joining report on 1.1.1975. The applicant, however, was not given benefit of Army service despite his request and representations which were rejected on the ground that the applicant was appointed against unreserved post, therefore, he cannot be given the benefit available to the Ex.-servicemen under the Demobilised Armed Forces Personnel (Reservation of Vacancies in the Himachal Pradesh State Non-Technial Services) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter to as the Rules). It is further claimed that the applicant in fact was entitled for such benefits in view of the instructions contained in letter Annexure A-10 issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh General Administration Department, hence this original application. 3.The respondents resisted and denied the claim of the applicant on the ground that the case of the applicant was not covered under the Rules because the applicant was appointed against general unreserved vacancy and not against a post reserved for Ex-servicemen. 4.We have heard Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate who appeared vice counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents. 5.It is not in dispute that the applicant is an Ex-serviceman but was not appointed against the post reserved for Ex-servicemen. Admittedly he was appointed against a general unreserved post. The question as to how the cases of such persons are to be dealt with has to be determined in view of the contents of Annexure A-10, a letter issued by the Government of H.P. giving specific instructions as to how the released Army personnel who have been given re-appointment against general unreserved post are to be dealt with. The relevant portion of Annexure A-10 reads as under :- “.........But where a Released Army Personnel has qualified against a non-reserved vacancy and has been appointed against a general unreserved vacancy in the first instance he should be given an option (only at the time of first appointment) to accept a reserved vacancy, even if it occurs subsequent to his appointment. This will automatically give the benefit of concession like seniority etc. in the manner specified in the Rules ibid.” 6.It is clear from a bare reading of the above quoted portion of the communication Annexure A-10 that as and when a Released Army Personnel has been appointed against general un-reserved vacancy, he should be given option at the time of first appointment to accept a reserved vacancy even if it occurs subsequent to his appointment. It is not in dispute that such option had never been given by the respondents to the applicant. On the contrary his request and representations claiming benefit were turned down which is contrary to the letter and spirit of the instructions contained in Annexure A-10. In fact the respondents in consonance with the aforesaid instructions were required to give option to the applicant and their failure to do so being a lapse on their part cannot be a reason for denying the benefit to the applicant for which he is legitimately entitled. 7.In Harbinder Singh v. State of H.P. and others, O.A. No. 1231/2002 decided on June, 3, 2004), Kuldeep Singh v. State of H.P. and others, O.A. 884/2002 decided on 30.11.2007), Kashmir Singh v. State of H.P. and others, Latest HLJ 2001(HP 393 : 2001(1) Cur.L.J. (H.P.) 450 and Janak Singh Sen v. HRTC and others, O.A. (M) 162/2003 decided on 29.5.2007 : 2007(2) Cur.L.J. (H.P.) 39 a similar view had been taken by the Tribunal as hereinabove. Thus, in view of the settled position in law the applicant is entitled for the relief claimed. 8.As a result, Annexures A-8 and A-9 are quashed and set aside and the respondents are directed to treat the applicant as having been appointed against the vacancy reserved for Ex.-Servicemen which became available after the appointment of the applicant in the respondents department in consonance with the instructions contained in Annexure A-10 and give him all the consequential benefits in accordance with such instructions and the provisions of the Rules within a period of 8 weeks from the date of this order. This original application is disposed of in terms of the above orders leaving the parties to bear their own costs. M.R.B. ———————