[Retirement Age] Ayurvedic, Allopathic doctors should not be discriminated; AYUSH doctors entitled to enhanced retirement age: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that ayurvedic doctors covered under AYUSH are also entitled to the benefit of enhanced superannuation age of 65 years (raised from 60 years), at par with allopathic doctors and that "both render service to patients and on this core aspect and there is nothing to distinguish them." (North Delhi Municipal Corporation vs Dr Ram Naresh Sharma).A Bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and Hrishikesh Roy held that the difference in the method of treatment employed by the two systems will not be a reasonable ground to classify ayuverdic and allopathic doctors differently for fixing retirement age. "The only difference is that AYUSH doctors are using indigenous systems of medicine like Ayurveda, Unani, etc. and CHS doctors are using Allopathy for tending to their patients. In our understanding, the mode of treatment by itself under the prevalent scheme of things, does not qualify as an intelligible differentia. Therefore, such unreasonable classification and discrimination based on it would surely be inconsistent with Article 14 of the Constitution," the judgment said. The judgment was delivered on an appeal by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation against a Delhi High Court judgment which had upheld a Central Administrative Tribunal order holding that applicants who are ayurvedic doctors covered under AYUSH are also entitled to the benefit of enhanced superannuation age of 65 years (raised from 60 years), just like the allopathic doctors. .It was argued by the NDMC that classification of AYUSH doctors and doctors under CHS in different categories is reasonable and permissible in law. However, the Supreme Court held that the classification is discriminatory and unreasonable since doctors under both segments are performing the same function of treating and healing patients. .The Court opined that doctors, both under AYUSH and CHS, render service to patients and on this core aspect and there is nothing to distinguish them. There is no rational justification for having different dates for bestowing the benefit of extended age of superannuation to these two categories of doctors, the Court said. ."Hence, the order of AYUSH Ministry (F. No. D. 14019/4/2016EI (AYUSH)) dated 24.11.2017 must be retrospectively applied from 31.05.2016 to all concerned respondent doctors, in the present appeals. All consequences must follow from this conclusion," the Court ruled. .The top court further directed that NDMC's action in not paying the respondent doctors their due salary and benefits, while their counterparts in CHS system received salary and benefits in full, "must be seen as discriminatory". "We have no hesitation in holding that the respondent doctors are entitled to their full salary arrears and the same is ordered to be disbursed, within 8 weeks from today. Belated payment beyond the stipulated period will carry interest, at the rate of 6% from the date of this order until the date of payment. It is ordered accordingly," the Court directed. .Supreme Court has noted that "No work should go unpaid’ should be the appropriate doctrine to be followed in these cases since "the service rendered by the ayurveda doctors have been productive both for the patients and also the employer."."We are quite clear in our mind that the respondents must be paid their lawful remuneration arrears and current, as the case may be. The State cannot be allowed plead financial burden to deny salary for the legally serving doctors. Otherwise it would violate their rights under Articles 14, 21 and 23 of the Constitution," the judgment added. .[Read Judgment]