STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. ANISUR RAHMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Special Leave Petitions raise the question as to whether the doctors, practicing allopathy and indigenous medicine; like Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Unani etc. can be treated equally for the purpose of determining service conditions; herein, specifically retirement age.

(2.) Reliance has been placed on a series of judgements of this Court which took different stands on the question of retirement age and pay scales. In New Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma & Ors.,(2021) 17 SCC 642. a Division Bench was concerned with the enhancement of retirement age from 60 to 65 years, effected by the NDMC to General Duty Medical Officers (GDMO) of the Central Health Scheme (CHS), while the doctors covered under AYUSH (including Ayurvedic doctors) were denied the said benefit. There were interim orders by the Administrative Tribunal and the High Court by virtue of which the AYUSH doctors were also continued. When the matters were pending, AYUSH came out with a communication that the doctors under it will also be enabled superannuation at 65 years with effect from 27/9/2017; as approved by the Union Cabinet. This Court found that the AYUSH doctors and the doctors under the CHS cannot be classified in different categories since though practicing different forms of medicine; indigenous system and allopathy, they render the very same service to the patients, and any classification would be unreasonable and discriminatory.

(3.) The issue with respect to different pay scales for doctors holding MBBS degree and its higher qualifications as distinguishable from doctors having a degree in indigenous systems came up for consideration in State of Gujarat & Ors. v. Dr. P.A. Bhatt & Ors.,2023 SCC OnLine SC 503. The decision in Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma was distinguished on three grounds. One, that it was based on a decision of the Union Cabinet permitting those doctors under AYUSH also the higher retirement age, which direction came when the matters were pending before the Court. It was also held that the question of age of retirement stands on a different footing from the service conditions relating to pay and allowances and revision thereof. Then, it was emphasised that the fundamental distinction with respect to equal work for equal pay and as to whether the two categories of employees can be considered to be performing equal work or not, was not dealt with in Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma.