“Having taken a conscious decision to withhold assent, later can he say now I’m adopting the third option available to me to refer it to the President? Because at each stage in Article 200, the prefix is or — either he assents to the Bill or he withholds assent … or he reserves it for President’s consideration,” Justice Pardiwala added.

Article 200 of the Constitution grants the Governor the power to either approve or withhold approval of Bills passed by the state legislature. Elaborating on the question, Justice Pardiwala explained, "The reason for posing this question is: if the Governor assents, the matter is concluded; if he reserves the Bill, the matter is also concluded. But if he withholds assent, the first proviso comes into play. Can the Governor, in such a case, refer the matter to the President to overcome that?"

In response, Attorney General Venkataramani stated that the answer would depend on the specific facts of the case. However, the bench clarified that they were not referring to the fact situation but were asking whether such an action is legally permissible. The Attorney General affirmed that it was permissible, suggesting that Article 200 could be interpreted flexibly.