No fundamental right to public holiday: Bombay High Court

Declaring public holidays is a matter of government policy and nobody has a fundamental right to public holiday, the Bombay High Court recently observed while rejecting a petition to declare August 2 as a public holiday for celebrating the liberation/ independence of the Union Territory (UT) of Dadra & Nagar Haveli [Kishnabhai Nathubhai Ghutia & Anr. v. The Hon’ble Administrator Union Territory & Ors.].A Bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Madhav Jamdar also observed that there are too many public holidays in India, and an endeavour has to be made to reduce them instead of increasing their count."There is no legally enforceable right that can be said to have been infringed. Nobody has a fundamental right to a public holiday..As it is, we have far too many public holidays in this country. Perhaps the time has come to reduce, not increase, the number of public holidays," the 3-page long order stated. .The plea filed by Kishnabhai Nathubhai Ghutia stated that August 2, 1954 was the date when Dadra and Nagar Haveli gained “liberation/ independence” from Portuguese rule and became part of India.It was further submitted that from 1954 to 2020, August 2 was permitted as a public holiday on account of liberation or independence, which was later discontinued from July 29, 2021. The contention was that if other similar date as August 15 can be declared as public holiday for national independence, then there was no reason why August 2 should not be declared a public holiday for Dadra & Nagar Haveli..The petition filed through advocate Devmani Shukla referred to an order of another Bench of High Court in 2019 also pertaining to the UT in which the issue was raised regarding 'Good Friday' being listed as a restricted (optional) holiday but not a gazetted holiday. Taking into consideration that Christmas and similar holidays are widely celebrated, the Bench in 2019 had disposed of that case by directing the administrator of Dadra and Nagar Haveli to declare Good Friday as a gazetted holiday in the UT. The Court, however, drew a distinction between the present case and the 2019 case on the ground that the earlier plea pertained to the failure of the gazette to make compulsory a public holiday rather than keeping it optional. The Bench then summed up their observation by holding that "whether or not to declare a particular day as a public holiday or an optional holiday or no holiday at all is as a matter of government policy" and not a legally enforceable right. .Finding no substance in the petition, it was rejected without any costs. .Advocates Bhavesh Parmar, Rajesh Sahani, Reshma Nair appeared with Shukla for the petitioners. Advocate Saurabh Kshirsagar holding for Hiten Venegaokar appeared for the Administrator of UT. .[Read order]