Governor Verdict: The 11 Questions Supreme Court Answered And The 3 It Didn’t

The Supreme Court, in a Presidential reference under Article 143, responded to 11 out of 14 questions posed by President Droupadi Murmu on the powers of governors under Articles 200 and 201. The Court held that a Governor cannot simply withhold a bill — their options are to assent, return with comments, or reserve for the President. It affirmed that while the Governor usually acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, the constitution affords discretion in certain scenarios. The Court rejected judicial imposition of timelines on governors and presidents, saying that ‘elasticity’ is built into Articles 200 and 201, and ‘deemed consent’ cannot be presumed in absence of strict deadlines. It declined to answer three questions it deems irrelevant or too broadly framed, and reiterated the doctrine of separation of powers, cautioning against the judiciary usurping executive functions via Article 142.