Women candidates are entitled to horizontal reservation and not vertical reservation. The principle of prospective overruling is not applicable where the law declared by the Supreme Court held the field while the recruitment process was undertaken.

1. - The only grievance raised in the petition, is that the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short 'Commission'), accorded reservation in excess to female candidates in the recruitment process for the post of Teacher Grade-III in response to the advertisement dated 2nd June, 2004; which has resulted into non-selection of the petitioner.

2. Shorn off unnecessary details the skeletal material facts essential for appreciation of the controversy raised herein are that the respondent-Commission vide advertisement dated 2nd June, 2004, invited applications from eligible candidates for appointment to the post of Teacher Grade-III under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1996', for short), for recruitment in total 25712 vacant posts. The advertisement also indicated number of vacancies reserved for various categories including women.

3. Mr. Ashok Gaur, Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, referring to the contents of the additional documents placed on record along with the miscellaneous application number 57944 of 2014; asserted that in response to an application under Right to Information Act, 2005; the respondent-Commission furnished the information of the women candidates accorded appointments. On the conclusion of the recruitment process as a consequence of the advertisement dated 2nd June, 2004; for the post of Teacher Grade-III, the number of women candidates in General, Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Class, as information furnished, which reads thus:-

fo"k;%& lwpuk dk vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds rgr lwpuk miyC/k djok;s tkus ds lEcU/k esaA lanHkZ% r`rh; Js.kh v/;kid 2004 ds laca/k esaA mijksDr fo"k;kUrxZr funsZ'kkuqlkj ys[k gS vki }kjk pkgh xbZ lwpuk fuEukuqlkj gS&

4. According to the learned counsel, from a glance of the information furnished by the respondent-Commission, it is an admitted fact that 1445 women candidates in General Category, 200 women candidates in Scheduled Caste Category, 708 women candidates in Scheduled Tribe Category, and 1 woman candidate in OBC Category, have been accorded appointment in excess to the reservation prescribed under the law. The details of cut off marks with reference to each category has also been furnished along with the details of date of birth of the concerned candidates.

5. The apprehension of the petitioner, therefore, stands proved in view of the admission by the respondent-Commission as is evident from the information furnished, which is available on record. Thus, for the illegality committed by the respondent-Commission, the petitioner has been deprived of appointment.

6. It is asserted that women candidates are entitled to horizontal reservation and not vertical reservation, and therefore, the respondent-Commission committed a manifest illegality while according vertical reservation to the women candidates, which has resulted into excess reservation in favour of women candidates depriving the petitioner of his fundamental right of appointment to public service.

7. Learned counsel would further submit that the correct procedure which ought to be applied while according horizontal reservation, is no more res-integra, as has been declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court of the land in the case of Anil Kumar Gupta (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court in no uncertain te