The MLA stated that this is an attempt to dig a pit for democracy. Around 26,000 people are expected to vote at the booths set up here. A video is being sent to the Election Commission regarding the issue.

Non-BJP ruled states are cautious because they believe guidelines provide MHA with too much leverage, allowing it to impose its preferences. They argue officers recommended by the MHA are unacceptable to the states, prompting them to also opt for acting DGs as a workaround.

A valid question from other side arises: Why isn't there a similar arrangement for the appointment of a state's chief secretary, and why is it specifically focused on the DGP position?

Anticipate contention in coming days over this issue. Guidelines are being labeled as 'absurd' and unconstitutional. Some argue that since the CM is face of governance & accountable to voters, they should have the authority to choose officer they deem suitable for position.

In UPSC during screening the officers with less than six months of service are omitted, & it sends three names of three senior most officers to choose from. The final decision lies with the head of  excutive.

In compliance to the Prakash Singh vs Union of India the guidelines for appointing State DGPs were established in 2009. Process entails the list of all DG rank officers goes to MHA and DoPT, which forwards it to UPSC.

An alarmed MHA is now asking the states to strictly adhere to Supreme court guidelines in 2006 in a police reforms case  about appointing DGPs.  It views the trend as a way to get 'favourites' in coveted post.

UP appointed 1990 batch IPS Prashant Kumar last week as acting DG, causing him to supersede 17 officers. The MHA isn't happy with this trend picking up, which it wants to arrest before it becomes a norm and undermines its writ.