How SC answered Prez’s questions

On May 13, President Droupadi Murmu made a rare reference to the Supreme Court under Article 143 of the Constitution, seeking its opinion on 14 questions regarding the powers that the President and governors exercise in granting assent to Bills. On Thursday, the court gave its answers.

- 

What are the constitutional options before a Governor when a Bill is presented under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?

The Governor, under Article 200, has three constitutional options: assent to the Bill, reserve it for the President, or withhold assent and return it to the Legislature with comments. The power to return a Bill with comments is not available for Money Bills.

Is the Governor bound by the aid and advice tendered by the Council of Ministers (COM) while exercising all options available with him when a Bill is presented before him under Article 200?

The Governor enjoys discretion in choosing from these three constitutional options and is not bound by the aid and advice of the CoM, while exercising his function under Article 200

Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the Governor under Article 200 justiciable?

The discharge of the Governor's function under Article 200, is not justiciable. The Court cannot enter into a merits review of the decision so taken. However, in glaring circumstances of inaction that is prolonged, unexplained, and indefinite - the Court can issue a limited mandamus for the Governor to discharge his function under Article 200 within a reasonable time period, without making any observations on the merits of the exercise of his discretion.

Is Article 361 of the Constitution an absolute bar to the judicial review in relation to the actions of a Governor under Article 200?