New Delhi – The Supreme Court has decided to escalate the debate on the parity between AYUSH and allopathic doctors by referring the matter to a larger bench. This move aims to settle the question of whether practitioners of indigenous medical systems like Ayurveda, Unani, and homeopathy should be treated the same as ‘allopathic’ doctors when it comes to service conditions, retirement age, and salary scales.
The decision came after a bench led by Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran noted a divergence of opinions on the issue. They had previously reserved their order on pleas questioning the differing retirement ages for modern medicine practitioners and AYUSH doctors in government facilities.
In their October 17 order, the court acknowledged the need for an authoritative pronouncement, stating that the question of equal treatment for service benefits between doctors of the two systems requires clarification. The court also touched upon the historical context of the term ‘allopathy,’ which was coined by homeopathy’s founder to critique contemporary medical practices.
The court’s review highlighted that previous judicial decisions had not presented a consistent stance on whether AYUSH doctors are entitled to the same retirement benefits and pay scales as their allopathic counterparts.
Citing state submissions, the court recognized that increasing retirement age is often a measure to ensure a sufficient pool of experienced medical professionals. However, it also noted that the scarcity of practitioners seen in allopathy is generally not present in indigenous medicine systems, particularly since critical life-saving procedures are not typically performed by AYUSH practitioners.
Given these considerations, the bench referred the matter to a larger bench for a conclusive decision. In the interim, states and authorities have been given the option to temporarily retain AYUSH practitioners beyond their current retirement age, up to the age applicable to allopathic doctors. This interim arrangement will be without regular pay and allowances, with adjustments to be made based on the final ruling.
If the larger bench rules in favor of AYUSH doctors, they will be entitled to full pay and allowances for the extended period. Conversely, those not continued in service will still be eligible for arrears if the judgment favors them.
The court directed that AYUSH doctors continuing in service during this interim period should receive half of their pay and allowances, to be adjusted against their pension or regular emoluments depending on the final outcome.
The case involved around 31 petitions and included arguments from various lawyers, including Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the Rajasthan government. The issue had previously reached the Rajasthan High Court, which had ruled in favor of AYUSH doctors, stating that differential retirement ages violated constitutional principles of equality.
The state government had argued that the retirement age for allopathic doctors was raised due to a shortage, a situation not mirrored by AYUSH doctors, making a similar increase unnecessary for them. This stance led to the legal challenges that have now prompted the Supreme Court’s referral to a larger bench.