Heard Shri Sashi Nandan for the petitioner and Shri Lalji Sinha for the respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to send the petitioner for training as con stable in the R. P. F. It appears that the petitioner appeared in the examination for recruitment of constables in the R. P. F. in 1994. The petitioner passed the written and oral tests and was issued letter dt. 16-3-1994, true copy of which is Annexure-2 to the writ petition, by which he was informed that he had been selected. In pursuance of that let ter the petitioner reported on 24-3-1994. He was physically examined and found physi cally fit vide Annexure-3 to the petition. After the selection he was entitled to be sent for training. However, it appears that there were two criminal cases pending against the petitioner. In one case being crime No. 68 of 1988 the petitioner has been acquitted. It is Denied law that every judg ment operates retrospectively (unless ex pressly made prospective) and hence it will be deemed that the petitioner was never involved in the criminal case once he was acquitted.

3. As regards the other criminal case which is referred to