The Supreme Court gave a constitutional ruling that clarified the powers of Governors and the President under Articles 200 and 201, ruling no judicial timelines or deemed assent can be imposed, while answering 11 of 14 Presidential Reference questions and leaving 3 unresolved.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India, in a landmark advisory opinion, clarified the constitutional powers of Governors and the President under Articles 200 and 201. This comes following a Presidential Reference filed by President Droupadi Murmu under Article 143 of the Constitution, questioning whether judicial timelines or “deemed assent” can be applied to bills pending with the Governor or President.
The ruling, delivered by a five-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, reaffirms the principle of separation of powers and the independence of constitutional functionaries.
Background of the Case
The Presidential Reference followed the April 8, 2025 Supreme Court ruling, which held that Governors cannot indefinitely sit on bills passed by State legislatures. While Article 200 does not specify a deadline, the Court emphasized that Governors must act within a reasonable time and cannot stall the democratic process.
The Court also clarified that under Article 201, the President must decide on reserved bills within three months, and in case of delay, reasons must be recorded and communicated to the concerned State.
President Droupadi Murmu subsequently sought clarification on whether judicially imposed timelines or the concept of deemed assent could be applied to Governors or the President, raising 14 key questions under Article 143 of the Constitution.
The 14 key questions raised by the President are:
- “What are the constitutional options before a governor when a bill is presented to him under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?”
- “Is the Governor bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers while exercising all the options available to him when a bill is presented before him under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?”
- “Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India justiciable?”
- “Is Article 361 of the Constitution of India an absolute bar to judicial review in relation to the actions of the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?”
- “In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed time limit and the manner of exercise of powers by the Governor, can timelines be imposed and the manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial orders for the exercise of all powers under Article 200 of the Constitution of India by the Governor?”
- “Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the President under Article 201 of the Constitution of India justiciable?”
- “In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed timeline and the manner of exercise of powers by the President, can timelines be imposed and the manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial orders for the exercise of discretion by the President under Article 201 of the Constitution of India?”
- “In light of the constitutional scheme governing the powers of the President, is the President required to seek advice of the Supreme Court by way of a reference under Article 143 of the Constitution of India and take the opinion of the Supreme Court when the Governor reserves a bill for the President’s assent or otherwise?”
- “Are decisions of the Governor and the President under Article 200 and Article 201 of the Constitution of India, respectively, justiciable at a stage anterior to the law coming into force? Is it permissible for the courts to undertake judicial adjudication over the contents of a bill, in any manner, before it becomes law?”
- “Can the exercise of constitutional powers and the orders of/by President/Governor be substituted in any manner under Article 142 of the Constitution of India?”
- “Is a law made by the state legislature a law in force without the assent of the Governor granted under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?”
- “In view of the proviso to Article 145 of the Constitution of India, is it not mandatory for any bench of this court to first decide as to whether the question involved in the proceedings before it is of such a nature which involves substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution and to refer it to a bench of minimum five judges?”
- “… the powers of the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India are limited to matters of procedural law, or Article 142 of the Constitution of India extends to issuing directions/passing orders which are contrary to or inconsistent with existing substantive or procedural provisions of the Constitution or law in force?”
- “Does the Constitution bar any other jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to resolve disputes between the Union government and the state governments except by way of a suit under Article 131 of the Constitution of India?”
The Supreme Court Advisory Opinion
1. Governors’ Options Under Article 200
The Court clarified that a Governor has three constitutional options when a bill is presented:
- Assent to the bill
- Reserve the bill for the President’s consideration
- Withhold assent and return the bill to the legislature with comments
Once a legislature passes a reconsidered bill, the Governor cannot withhold assent but can still refer it to the President.
2. Governor’s Discretion and Advice of Council of Ministers
While the Governor ordinarily acts on the advice of the Council of Ministers, Article 200 allows limited discretion, particularly in referring a bill to the President or returning it with comments. The Court emphasized this does not confer unfettered powers and remains consistent with a responsible constitutional government.
3. Judicial Review and Justiciability
- The Governor’s or President’s exercise of discretion is not subject to merit-based judicial review.
- Courts cannot intervene before a bill becomes law. Judicial scrutiny is permissible only after the bill has been assented and enacted.
- Limited judicial review is allowed only in cases of prolonged or unexplained delay, to direct action within a reasonable timeframe.
4. Timelines and Deemed Assent
- No fixed timelines can be imposed on Governors or the President.
- The concept of deemed assent is unconstitutional and would violate the doctrine of separation of powers.
- The April 2025 ruling that set deadlines for Governors was therefore declared erroneous.
5. President’s Reference to the Supreme Court
- The President does not need to seek advice from the Supreme Court for every bill reserved by the Governor.
- However, a reference can still be made if clarification is required.
6. Article 142 Limitations
- The Court cannot substitute the Governor’s or President’s powers under Article 142 to enforce deemed assent.
7. Bills Cannot Become Law Without Assent
A state legislature’s bill does not come into force without the Governor’s assent. This ensures the Governor’s legislative role cannot be bypassed by another constitutional authority.
What This Means for Governors and the President
- Preservation of Separation of Powers: The judiciary cannot overstep into the functions of the executive.
- Flexibility for Governors and Presidents: Articles 200 and 201 maintain a sense of elasticity to address diverse political and legislative contexts.
- Limited Judicial Intervention: Courts may intervene only to prevent prolonged inaction, not to question the merits of the decision.
- Clarification on Presidential Reference: The Supreme Court reaffirmed its advisory role under Article 143 while underscoring that the President need not consult the Court routinely.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta highlighted that Governors are custodians of the Constitution, and judicial timelines could violate the separation of powers.
Attorney General R. Venkataramani emphasized that the Governor’s independent judgment is integral to Article 200 and cannot be curtailed by courts.
Case Title:
Re: Assent, Withholding, or Reservation of Bills by the Governor and President of India
SPL. REF. No. 1/2025
Questions referred by the President under Article 143 of the Constitution:
READ JUDGMENT
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Assent To Bills