But the order required me to identify such laws so that the court does not have to deal with the issue piecemeal,” Ramachandran said.Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who was representing the Centre, urged the court to decide the issue of Jharkhand DGP. He said that on October 8, while examining the Selection and Appointment of Director General and Inspector General of Police Jharkhand (Head of Police Force) Rules, 2025, the court had asked Jharkhand whether it is keen to “revisit” the rules as it was found to be in “teeth” of the Prakash Singh judgment.The Union government had filed an application challenging the present appointment of Jharkhand DGP Tadasha Mishra who was appointed on December 30, 2025, with only a day left for her retirement.The court had even sought the response of Mishra who was represented in court on Tuesday by senior advocate Meenakshi Arora.

In its October 8 order, the bench said, “In the event of the Rules being annulled, the consequent appointment of Tadasha Mishra as Jharkhand DGP will be required to be set aside.”Senior advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for Jharkhand said that he had spoken to the state chief secretary and will be filing an affidavit in this regard before the next date of hearing.Sibal cited the example of the Uttar Pradesh law being on similar lines and pointed to Mehta if Centre would challenge the law in question. Mehta said, “I do not appear for UP.

I do not have the luxury to appear for all parties.”Even on the Jharkhand DGP appointment, the Centre had earlier maintained that “The Union of India does not choose any state. This has come to our notice so we have filed an application.

If they can point out any other state law or rules that are bad, that should also go.”In his report submitted to the court, the amicus said the provisions of the Jharkhand Rules which allows an officer having less than six months residual tenure to become DGP is clearly in violation of the court’s Prakash Singh judgment. On Mishra’s appointment, the amicus said, “The appointment of the current DGP one day prior to her retirement is clearly in complete violation of the principles laid down in Prakash Singh judgments and orders.”