Anoop Singh vs Union Of India & Ors.

C. Hari Shankar, J.

We have pointed out to Mr. Bhargava, learned Counsel for the petitioner that prayer (ii) in this petition may not be amenable to adjudication in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Ms. Rudy, who appears for the respondents points out that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court in WP (C) 1940/2025^{11.Anoop Singh v UOI & Ors.}, seeking to make out a case on the basis of the memorandum of understanding between the BSF and the SBI. On 24 February 2025, a Coordinate Bench of this Court had granted time to the petitioner to make submissions on the entitlement of the petitioner to the Golden Jubilee Seema Prahari Kalyan Kavach, under the scheme and memorandum of understanding. On the next date of hearing, i.e., 11 March 2025, the petitioner merely withdrew the writ petition without prejudice to his rights and contentions.

Now the petitioner has reinstituted the same cause before this Court, challenging the provision of the memorandum of understanding.

On our pointing out to Mr. Bhargava that the prayer (ii) in this writ petition may not be amenable to adjudication under Article 226, he seeks leave to withdraw the petition submitting that he would institute a proper petition which would be maintainable before this Court.

Leave and liberty is granted as aforesaid, the petition is disposed of as withdrawn.