S. Saghir Ahmad, J. - (1.) The classic Judgment of Patanjali Sastri, C. J. in State of Madras v. V. G. Row, (1952) SCR 597, has again to be referred to and relied upon in this case to settle the controversy regarding the constitutional validity of the Kerala Industrial Establishments (National and Festival Holidays) (Amendment) Act, 1990 (for short, 'the Amending Act') which has already been upheld by a single Judge, and in appeal, by the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court.
(2.) By the Amending Act of 1990 national and festival holidays, fixed under the Principal Act, namely, the Kerala Industrial Establishments (National and Festival Holidays) Act, 1958 (for short, 'the Parent Act') were altered. The national holidays were increased from three to four (with the addition of 2nd of October as Mahatma Gandhi's Birthday) and festival holidays were increased from four to nine. The total number of compulsory paid holidays were thus raised from seven to thirteen. This alteration was challenged by the appellants on the ground that the holidays, national and festival, so increased were violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to them under Article 19(1)(g) to carry on their trade, business or profession. It was also challenged on the ground of arbitrariness as the contention was that the increase in the number of national and festival holidays was wholly arbitrary, without there being any reasonable basis for such increase which has compelled the appellants to pay to their labour and other employees salary even for closed days on which they do not work.
(3.) Article 19(1)(g) provides as under: "19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.- (1) All citizens shall have the right- (a) to (f) ********** (g) to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. Sub-clause (6) of this Article provides as under:- "(6) Nothing in sub-clause (g) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of the general public, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause, and, in particular, nothing in the said sub-clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it relates to, or prevent the State from making any law relating to- (i) the professional or technical qualifications necessary for practising any profession or carrying on any occupation, trade of business, or (ii) the carrying on by the State, or by a corporation owned or controlled by the State, of any trade, business, industry or service, whether to the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or otherwise." ;