What is Article 200 of the Indian Constitution?
Historical Background
Key Points
12 points- 1.
The Governor has three options when a bill is presented after being passed by the State Legislature: give assent, withhold assent, or reserve it for the President's consideration. This power is outlined directly in Article 200.
- 2.
If the Governor gives assent, the bill becomes an Act (law) and is published in the State Gazette. This is the most straightforward outcome.
- 3.
If the Governor withholds assent, the bill does not become law. However, the Governor can return the bill to the legislature with a message requesting reconsideration. If the legislature passes the bill again, with or without amendments, and presents it to the Governor, the Governor *must* give assent. This is a crucial check on the Governor's power.
- 4.
The most contentious provision is the power to reserve a bill for the President's consideration. There is no constitutional requirement for the Governor to provide reasons for doing so. This is often used when the Governor believes the bill may be unconstitutional or against national interests.
- 5.
When a bill is reserved for the President, the President can either give assent, withhold assent, or direct the Governor to return the bill to the State Legislature for reconsideration. If the legislature passes it again, the President is *not* bound to give assent.
- 6.
Unlike the provision for the Governor, the President has no obligation to assent to a bill even after it has been reconsidered and passed again by the State Legislature. This gives the Union Government significant control over state legislation.
- 7.
A major point of contention is the lack of a specified timeline for the Governor to act on a bill. This silence has been exploited, leading to Governors delaying assent for extended periods, effectively stalling legislation. This has been challenged in courts.
- 8.
The Governor's power under Article 200 is subject to judicial review, meaning the courts can examine whether the Governor acted within their constitutional limits. However, the judiciary has often been hesitant to interfere in the Governor's discretionary powers.
- 9.
The phrase 'as soon as possible' in the first proviso to Article 200, regarding the Governor acting on bills, has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to signify the need for expediency. However, defining what 'as soon as possible' means in practice remains a challenge.
- 10.
The Governor is generally expected to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers in the state. However, when reserving a bill for the President's consideration, the Governor is considered to be acting in their discretion, potentially without being bound by the Council's advice. This is a key area of conflict.
- 11.
The power under Article 200 can be seen as a tool for 'coercive federalism,' where the Union Government exerts influence over state legislative processes through the Governor. This contrasts with 'cooperative federalism,' where the Union and states work together as equal partners.
- 12.
The misuse of Article 200 can undermine the legislative sovereignty of the states, eroding the federal foundations of the Indian Constitution. This is particularly concerning when Governors are perceived as acting on political instructions from the Union Government.
Recent Developments
6 developmentsIn 2023, the Supreme Court, in *State of Punjab v Principal Secretary to the Governor of Punjab*, held that the Governor is bound by the phrase 'as soon as possible' in Article 200, emphasizing the need for timely action on bills.
In 2025, the Supreme Court in *State of Tamil Nadu v The Governor of Tamil Nadu* placed reasonable curtailment on the discretionary powers of the Governor as the court held that ‘there is no pocket veto available to the Governor’ under Article 200.
However, just a month after the 2025 judgement, the President referred fourteen questions to the Supreme Court, most of which dealt with the matters already resolved by the Tamil Nadu judgment.
The Supreme Court's advisory opinion in 2025 diluted the *Tamil Nadu* ruling by declining to impose a timeline for gubernatorial action under Article 200, effectively legitimizing the constitutional loophole that enables the indefinite suspension of democratic accountability.
Several state governments, including Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Punjab, have expressed concerns about Governors delaying assent to bills, leading to political deadlocks and legal challenges in recent years.
The Tamil Nadu government appointed a High-Level Committee on Union-State Relations, chaired by Justice (retd) Kurian Joseph, which submitted a report advocating for a 'structural reset' of Indian federalism, including reforms related to the Governor's powers under Article 200 in 2025.
This Concept in News
1 topicsFrequently Asked Questions
121. What is the most common MCQ trap related to Article 200 of the Indian Constitution?
The most common trap is confusing the Governor's obligation to assent after the State Legislature re-passes a bill. While the Governor *must* assent if the legislature sends the bill back, the President has *no such obligation* if the Governor reserves the bill for presidential consideration and the legislature re-passes it. Examiners often test this difference.
Exam Tip
Remember: Governor = Must Assent on re-passage. President = No Obligation on re-passage. Think 'G' for Guarantee (Governor) and 'P' for Possible (President).
2. Why does Article 200 of the Indian Constitution exist – what problem does it solve that no other mechanism could?
Article 200 of the Indian Constitution exists to provide a mechanism for the Union Government to review state legislation that could potentially impinge upon national interests or constitutional matters. While the Union List and Concurrent List in the Seventh Schedule define the legislative boundaries, Article 200 acts as a safety valve. It allows the Governor to flag bills for Presidential consideration, especially when the Governor believes a state law might clash with Union law or policy, even if it technically falls under the State List. Without it, states could potentially enact laws detrimental to national unity, requiring more heavy-handed interventions later.
3. How does Article 200 of the Indian Constitution work in practice – give a real example of it being invoked/applied.
A recurring example is the reservation of bills related to land reform or language policy. For instance, in Tamil Nadu, bills mandating Tamil language proficiency for government jobs have been reserved for Presidential assent due to potential conflict with Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 16 (equality of opportunity in public employment). The Governor, in such cases, might feel that these bills, while aiming to promote local language, could discriminate against those not proficient in Tamil, thus requiring Presidential review to ensure constitutional compliance.
4. What happened when Article 200 of the Indian Constitution was last controversially applied or challenged?
The most recent controversy revolves around the Supreme Court's intervention in *State of Punjab v Principal Secretary to the Governor of Punjab* (2023) and *State of Tamil Nadu v The Governor of Tamil Nadu* (2025). The Supreme Court criticized Governors for unduly delaying assent to bills, emphasizing the 'as soon as possible' clause in Article 200. However, the subsequent Presidential reference and the Supreme Court's advisory opinion diluted the *Tamil Nadu* ruling, failing to set a strict timeline. This has led to continued disputes between state governments and Governors, particularly in states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Punjab, where Governors are perceived to be obstructing legislation passed by the state assemblies.
5. If Article 200 of the Indian Constitution didn't exist, what would change for ordinary citizens?
If Article 200 of the Indian Constitution didn't exist, state governments would have significantly more autonomy in enacting laws, potentially leading to policies that could either greatly benefit or disadvantage citizens depending on the specific state and its political leanings. Without the check of Presidential assent, there would be a higher risk of state laws infringing upon fundamental rights or contradicting national policies. For example, a state could potentially enact discriminatory laws without the Union government having an immediate mechanism to intervene. Conversely, states could also implement progressive policies more quickly, without waiting for central approval.
6. What is the strongest argument critics make against Article 200 of the Indian Constitution, and how would you respond?
The strongest argument is that Article 200 undermines federalism by giving the Union Government excessive control over state legislation, particularly due to the lack of a timeline for Presidential assent. This can lead to indefinite delays and effectively nullify the will of the state legislature. However, a counter-argument is that Article 200 is a necessary safeguard to prevent states from enacting laws that are detrimental to national interests or violate constitutional principles. The power should be used sparingly and judiciously, but its existence is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the Indian Union. Recent Supreme Court interventions suggest a move towards more accountability and timeliness, which could address some of these concerns.
7. How should India reform or strengthen Article 200 of the Indian Constitution going forward?
Several reforms could strengthen Article 200: answerPoints: * Mandatory Timelines: Establishing fixed timelines for both the Governor and the President to act on bills would prevent indefinite delays. * Reasoned Decisions: Requiring the Governor to provide reasons for reserving a bill for Presidential consideration would promote transparency and accountability. * Consultation Mechanism: Creating a formal consultation mechanism between the Union and the State governments when a bill is reserved could help resolve potential conflicts amicably. * Judicial Review: Strengthening judicial review of the Governor's discretionary powers under Article 200 could prevent arbitrary use of power.
8. What is the one-line distinction between Article 200 of the Indian Constitution and Article 201 of the Indian Constitution?
Article 200 of the Indian Constitution outlines the Governor's powers regarding bills passed by the State Legislature, while Article 201 of the Indian Constitution specifies the President's powers when a bill is reserved for their consideration by the Governor.
9. Why do students often confuse Article 163 (Governor's discretionary powers) with Article 200 (assent to bills), and what is the correct distinction?
Students confuse them because both relate to the Governor's powers. However, Article 163 deals with the Governor's *general* discretionary powers, where they can act without the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. Article 200, specifically, concerns the Governor's actions *regarding bills* passed by the State Legislature – giving assent, withholding assent, or reserving for the President. While reserving a bill *can* be a discretionary power, it's a specific power under Article 200, not a general one under Article 163.
10. How does India's Article 200 of the Indian Constitution compare favorably/unfavorably with similar mechanisms in other democracies?
Compared to other democracies, India's Article 200 is unique in its provision for the Governor to reserve bills for Presidential assent. In many other federal systems, such as the United States or Canada, the sub-national units (states/provinces) have greater autonomy in their legislative processes, and there isn't a direct equivalent to Presidential review of state laws. This can be seen as unfavorable, as it potentially undermines state autonomy. However, it can also be seen as favorable, as it provides a mechanism for ensuring national unity and preventing state laws that might conflict with national interests or constitutional principles, something that might be lacking in other federal systems.
11. What are the key provisions of Article 200 of the Indian Constitution that are most frequently tested in the UPSC exam?
The most frequently tested provisions are: answerPoints: * The three options available to the Governor: giving assent, withholding assent, or reserving the bill for the President's consideration. * The Governor's obligation to assent if the State Legislature re-passes the bill. * The President's *lack* of obligation to assent even after the State Legislature re-passes the bill when it was reserved by the Governor. * The *absence* of a specified timeline for the Governor to act on a bill (this is often tested in the context of recent Supreme Court cases).
12. What does Article 200 of the Indian Constitution NOT cover – what are its gaps and critics?
Article 200 of the Indian Constitution does *not* specify a timeline for the Governor to act on a bill, leading to potential delays. It also doesn't mandate the Governor to provide reasons for reserving a bill for Presidential consideration, reducing transparency. Critics argue that this lack of clarity gives the Governor excessive discretionary power, potentially undermining the legislative authority of the State Legislature. Furthermore, the article doesn't address the situation where the President withholds assent indefinitely, leaving the state legislature in limbo.