When a bill is presented to the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India, what are the constitutional options before him? Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India justified... The President has sought the opinion of the Supreme Court on 14 such questions.

President Draupadi Murmu has now questioned the decision to set a time limit for the President and Governors to take a decision on the bills passed by the assemblies. This historic decision was given by the Supreme Court on 8 April, to which President Murmu has reacted strongly and asked 14 questions. The phase of reactions to this decision of the Supreme Court continued for a long time. The opposition also raised this issue a lot. President Murmu has described this decision as being against the constitutional values ​​and systems as well as an 'encroachment' of constitutional limits. President Murmu has now sought the opinion of the Supreme Court on 14 constitutional questions under Article 143 (1) of the Constitution. 

The President sought the opinion of the Supreme Court on these 14 questions 

1. What are the constitutional options before the Governor when he is presented with a Bill under Article 200 of the Constitution of India? 
2. Is the Governor bound by the aid and advice given by the Council of Ministers while exercising all the options available to him on the introduction of a Bill under Article 200 of the Constitution of India? 
3. Whether the exercise of constitutional discretion by the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India is justified?
4. Whether Article 361 of the Constitution of India imposes an absolute bar on judicial review in respect of the actions of the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India? 
5. In the absence of constitutionally prescribed time limits and manner of exercise of powers by the Governor, can time limits be imposed and manner of exercise of all powers by the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India be prescribed through judicial orders? 
6. Whether the exercise of constitutional discretion by the President under Article 201 of the Constitution of India is justified?
7. In the absence of constitutionally prescribed time limits and manner of exercise of powers by the President, can time limits be imposed and manner of exercise prescribed by judicial orders for the exercise of discretion by the President under Article 201 of the Constitution of India? 
8. In the light of the constitutional scheme governing the powers of the President, is it necessary for the President to seek the advice of the Supreme Court by way of reference under Article 143 of the Constitution of India and to reserve the Bill for the assent of the President by the Governor or otherwise seek the opinion of the Supreme Court? 
9. Are decisions of the Governor and the President under Article 200 and Article 201 of the Constitution of India justiciable at the pre-enactment stage? Is it permissible for courts to take a judicial decision on the content of a bill before it becomes law? 
10. Whether the exercise of constitutional powers and orders of the President/Governor can be substituted in any way under Article 142 of the Constitution of India?
11. Whether a law made by the State Legislature is enforceable law without the consent of the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India? 
12. In view of the provision of Article 145(3) of the Constitution of India, is it not mandatory for any Bench of this Hon'ble Court to first decide whether the question involved in the proceedings before it is of such a nature as to involve substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution and refer the same to a Bench of not less than five Judges? 
13. Whether the powers of the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India are limited to matters of procedural law or Article 142 of the Constitution of India extends to issuing directions/passing orders which are contrary to or inconsistent with the existing substantive or procedural provisions of the Constitution or the law in force? 
14. Does the Constitution preclude any jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to decide disputes between the Union Government and State Governments except by way of suit under Article 131 of the Constitution of India?

In its important decision, the Supreme Court had said that if a bill is pending with the Governor for a long time, then it should be considered 'approved'. The President has objected to this and asked that when the Constitution of the country gives the President the discretion to take a decision on a bill, then how can the Supreme Court interfere in this process. 

PC:NDTVIndia