In 2025, the Supreme Court dealt with the recurring problem of Governors delaying assent to State Bills passed by Assemblies — neither signing, returning, nor reserving them for the President, leaving the Bills in constitutional limbo. This gubernatorial inaction became the subject of a major Court intervention, which was then followed by a rare Presidential Reference asking the Court to reconsider its own ruling.
The controversy centres on Articles 200 and 201, which govern how a Governor and the President deal with Bills presented to them, and on whether courts can impose timelines on functionaries who exercise discretion under these provisions. This raises foundational questions about the separation of powers and the limits of judicial review over constitutional discretion.
For exams, remember: Articles 200 and 201 deal with Governor's and President's assent to Bills; the 2025 episode shows the tension between judicially imposed timelines and gubernatorial/presidential discretion, and the unusual use of a Presidential Reference to revisit a Supreme Court ruling.