The Constitution of India
Article 200
Assent to Bills
When a Bill has been passed by the Legislative Assembly of a State or, in the case of a State having a Legislative Council, has been passed by both Houses of the Legislature of the State, it shall be presented to the Governor and the Governor shall declare either that he assents to the Bill or that he withholds assent therefrom or that he reserves the Bill for the consideration of the President:
Provided that the Governor may, as soon as possible after the presentation to him of the Bill for assent, return the Bill if it is not a Money Bill together with a message requesting that the House or Houses will reconsider the Bill or any specified provisions thereof and, in particular, will consider the desirability of introducing any such amendments as he may recommend in his message and, when a Bill is so returned, the House or Houses shall reconsider the Bill accordingly, and if the Bill is passed again by the House or Houses with or without amendment and presented to the Governor for assent, the Governor shall not withhold assent therefrom:
Provided further that the Governor shall not assent to, but shall reserve for the consideration of the President, any Bill which in the opinion of the Governor would, if it became law, so derogate from the powers of the High Court as to endanger the position which that Court is by this Constitution designed to fill.
Why this exists
Article 200 balances democratic law-making by elected State legislatures with certain checks by the Governor, who acts as a constitutional safeguard and a link to the Union government. The provision to return Bills lets the Governor flag concerns without simply vetoing legislation, while the mandatory assent after reconsideration ensures the Legislature's will ultimately prevails. The second proviso protects the judiciary's independence by ensuring Bills threatening High Court powers get Presidential scrutiny, since High Courts are a unifying constitutional institution beyond any single State's control.
How courts read it
Courts have held that while the Governor has discretion in choosing among the three options, this discretion is not unlimited or indefinite. In cases like State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary to the Governor of Punjab (2023), the Supreme Court clarified that Governors cannot sit on Bills indefinitely ('pocket veto') and must act within a reasonable time, as unexplained delay undermines the constitutional scheme of representative governance. Courts have also emphasized that once the Legislature re-passes a returned Bill, the Governor has no further discretion and must assent.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: The Governor can sit on a Bill forever without deciding.
Fact: Courts have clarified that the Governor must act within a reasonable time; indefinite delay defeats the constitutional design of Article 200. - Myth: The Governor can veto a Bill outright.
Fact: The Governor can only return a Bill (not a Money Bill) once for reconsideration; if the Legislature passes it again, the Governor must give assent. - Myth: The Governor decides alone on all sensitive Bills.
Fact: Bills that could endanger the High Court's constitutional position must be reserved for the President's consideration, not decided by the Governor.