Reservation of bills for President's consideration

Also called: Article 200, Article 201, President's assent to reserved state bills · Topic: State Government: Governor, Chief Minister, State Legislature and Union Territories · NCERT: Class 11, Ch 7 "Federalism"

Meaning

Reservation of bills for the President's consideration is the Governor's power under Article 200 to send a bill passed by the state legislature to the President instead of deciding on it. Under Article 201, the President then gives assent, withholds assent, or (for a non-money bill only) tells the Governor to return the bill to the House for reconsideration. The President need not assent even if the House passes the bill again.

It matters because this power lets the Union government delay or block a state's law. That makes it a key point of friction between the Union and the states. The Supreme Court has ruled on it several times since 2023.

Explanation

The journey of a state bill, step by step

1. The House passes the bill. In a state with a Legislative Council, both Houses must pass it [2].

2. The bill goes to the Governor. Under Art. 200, the Governor must "declare" one of three choices [2]: - give assent (formal approval; the bill becomes an Act, which means a law); - withhold assent and return the bill with a message asking the House to reconsider all of it or some clauses (first proviso). This is not allowed for a money bill (a bill only about taxes, government borrowing or spending) [2]; - reserve the bill for the President.

3. If the Governor returns the bill and the House passes it again, with or without changes, the Governor "shall not withhold assent" [2].

4. If the bill is reserved, the President decides under Art. 201: - assent, and the bill becomes law; - withhold assent, and the bill dies; - for a non-money bill only: direct the Governor to return it to the House.

5. If the bill is returned on the President's direction: - the House must reconsider it within six months; - if the House passes it again, it goes back to the President; - the President still need not assent.

When reservation is compulsory and when it is optional

• Compulsory (second proviso to Art. 200): the Governor must reserve a bill that would cut the High Court's powers so much that it endangers the court's place in the Constitution [2]. This is the only case of compulsory reservation.
• Optional: states usually seek reservation because the President's assent gives the law legal protection.
• Art. 254(2): a state law on a Concurrent List subject may clash with a central law. This clash is called repugnancy. The state law still prevails in that state if it was reserved and got the President's assent.
• Art. 31A / Art. 31C: state laws on taking over estates, and state laws that give effect to the Directive Principles, are protected only if they get the President's assent.
• Art. 304(b): state laws that put reasonable limits on trade inside or across states.
• Art. 288: state taxes on water or electricity used by authorities set up by the Union.
• Art. 360 (financial emergency): the President may direct that state money bills and financial bills be reserved.

Governor vs President on a returned bill

Point	Governor (Art. 200)	President on a reserved state bill (Art. 201)
Can return a non-money bill?	Yes	Yes, through the Governor
Time for the House to reconsider	Not fixed	Within 6 months
Must assent after re-passage?	Yes	No
Constitutional time limit for own decision	None ("as soon as possible")	None

The missing time limit

• The text sets no deadline. The first proviso only says the Governor should act "as soon as possible" [2]. The Constitution gives no fixed number of days for the Governor or the President.
• What this allows:
• A Governor can leave a bill pending for months or years.

• In effect, this is a pocket veto (killing a bill by never deciding on it).

• The Union parallel: President Zail Singh never acted on the Indian Post Office (Amendment) Bill, 1986. This is the classic example of a pocket veto.

In the Constitution and practice

• Where it sits: Arts. 200 and 201, Part VI (the States). Art. 200 came from Draft Article 175, which the Constituent Assembly debated on 30 July, 1 August and 17 October 1949 [2].
• Who uses it: the Governor reserves the bill. The President decides on the advice of the Union Council of Ministers. That is why the federalism chapter of the Class 11 NCERT counts reservation among the features of "federalism with a strong central government".
• Recent standoffs (2023-24): all of these came up when rival parties ruled the Union and the state.
• Tamil Nadu: in October 2023, the state government went to the Supreme Court because Governor R.N. Ravi had not acted on 12 bills passed between January 2020 and April 2023 [3].
• Kerala: the Governor reserved seven bills in November 2023. In 2024 the President withheld assent to several of them, mostly university amendment bills.

• Telangana (2023): a similar dispute over bills left pending with the Governor.

• State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary to the Governor of Punjab (10 November 2023), bench led by CJI D.Y. Chandrachud [5]:

• A Governor who withholds assent must return the bill to the House. The Governor cannot keep it pending forever.
• The House had been adjourned (paused, with the session still open), not prorogued (the session formally ended by the Governor). So its June 2023 sittings were valid.

• Principle: the Governor is an unelected head and cannot block the work of an elected legislature.

• State of Tamil Nadu v. Governor of Tamil Nadu (8 April 2025) [3]:

• The Court set aside the reservation of 10 bills and held them deemed to have received assent in November 2023. Deemed assent means a bill is treated as approved even though no formal assent was given.
• Once the House re-passes a bill the Governor withheld, the Governor cannot then reserve it for the President.
• The Court set time limits [3]:
  • Governor withholds or reserves on ministers' advice: 1 month.
  • Governor withholds or reserves against ministers' advice: 3 months.
  • Governor assents to a re-passed bill: 1 month.
  • President decides on a reserved bill: 3 months.

• It held that judicial review (courts checking whether an action is lawful) covers two decisions: a reservation made against ministers' advice, and the President's withholding of assent [3].

• 16th Presidential Reference opinion (20 November 2025): this is the current position.

• Background: in May 2025 the President asked the Supreme Court 14 questions under Art. 143, the article that lets the President ask the Court for its advice [4].
• Opinion: a five-judge Constitution Bench answered on 20 November 2025 [4][6].
• No court-made timelines. The Constitution sets no time limit, so courts should not invent one. The April 2025 deadlines no longer hold [4].
• No "deemed assent". The Constitution does not allow it [4].
• Discretion. The Governor has three options: assent, reserve, or withhold and return a non-money bill with comments. The Governor is not bound by ministers' advice on this choice [4].
• Limited court role. Courts cannot review the merits of an Art. 200 decision, which is not justiciable (not open to court review). In cases of prolonged inaction, though, a court may give limited directions, such as telling the Governor to decide [4].
• What still stands: the 2023 Punjab rule. A Governor cannot simply sit on a bill, and withholding must lead to returning it to the House.

Don't confuse with

• Governor's withholding and return (Art. 200, first proviso): after the House re-passes the bill, the Governor must assent. On a reserved bill under Art. 201, the President is never bound to assent.
• President's assent to Parliament's bills (Art. 111): if Parliament re-passes a returned bill, the President must assent. For a reserved state bill (Art. 201), the President need not.
• Compulsory vs optional reservation: only a bill that endangers the High Court's position must be reserved. Reservation under Arts. 254(2), 31A, 31C, 304(b) and 288 is optional and done to gain legal protection.
• Pocket veto: this is not a power written in the Constitution. It is the effect of never deciding, made possible because Arts. 200 and 201 set no deadline (example: Zail Singh, 1986).

Prelims Hooks

• Art. 200, second proviso: reservation is compulsory only for a bill that endangers the High Court's position [2].
• Money bills: neither the Governor (Art. 200) nor the President (Art. 201) can return them for reconsideration.
• Common trap: after re-passage, the Governor must assent (Art. 200), but the President need not (Art. 201). Under Art. 201, the House must reconsider a returned bill within six months.
• Art. 254(2): a repugnant Concurrent List state law that is reserved and gets the President's assent prevails in that state.
• Punjab case (2023): withholding must be followed by return to the House. Sittings of a House that was adjourned, not prorogued, are valid [5].
• Tamil Nadu case (8 April 2025) vs the 16th Presidential Reference (20 November 2025): the first set 1-month and 3-month timelines and held 10 bills deemed assented [3]. The second removed court-made timelines and "deemed assent", but allows limited directions in cases of prolonged inaction [4].

Mains Points

• Federal tension:
• Reservation and open-ended delay let an unelected Governor and the Union government override an elected state legislature.
• This weakens cooperative federalism and responsible government (a government answerable to the elected House).

• This pattern appeared in Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Telangana in 2023-24.

• Courts vs the text:

• The 2023 Punjab and April 2025 Tamil Nadu judgments tried to fill the "as soon as possible" gap.
• The November 2025 opinion said deadlines must come from the Constitution, not from judges.

• A constitutional amendment that sets time limits is now the main reform option. The Sarkaria Commission (1988) said reservation should be rare, limited to clear constitutional issues, and decided within time limits. The Punchhi Commission (2010) also suggested a fixed time limit for the Governor's decision.

• Balanced view: reservation is a valid safeguard. It protects High Courts, keeps laws uniform across India and checks bills that may be unconstitutional. The problem is its partisan use and the lack of deadlines, not the power itself.

Related concepts

• Governor's assent to bills
• State of Punjab v. Governor of Punjab

Read more

• Assent to state bills and reservation for the President (Arts. 200-201)