Different retirement ages for Allopathic and Ayurvedic Doctors are discriminatory under Article 14 of the Constitution, necessitating equal treatment in superannuation age.

Order (Oral

25/03/2025

1. Petitioner is before this Court seeking the quashing of the order dated 30.09.2024 (Annex.-P/1), which indicates his date of retirement as 31.03.2025. Further, the petitioner seeks directions to the respondents to allow him to continue serving on the post of Senior Ayurvedic Medical Officer Grade II until he reaches the age of 62, i.e., until 31.03.2027.

2. At the very outset, it transpires that similarly situated counterparts of the petitioner had approached this Court vide D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13496/2021 along with other connected matters, which were allowed by the learned Division Bench vide a judgment dated 13.07.2022. The said order being relevant, is reproduced in verbatim hereinbelow:-

“Heard.

In these batch of petitions, the issue arising for consideration is as to whether providing different age of superannuation for Allopathic Doctors vis-a-vis Ayurvedic Doctors is discriminative to Article 14 of the Constitution of India . Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset rely upon the recent judicial pronouncement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of North Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs. Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma & Ors reported as 2021 SCC Online SC 540 and connected appeals to submit that in the aforesaid decision, it has been held that in the matter of fixing age of superannuation, no discriminatory treatment can be meted out as between the Allopathic Doctors and Ayurvedic Doctors. It is submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that as the doctors under both segments are performing the same function of treating and healing their patients, the classification is discriminatory and unreasonable. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that the classification for the purposes of prescribing different age of superannuation for Allopathic Doctors and Ayurvedic Doctors is based on rational integra and is a valid classification as not only their qualifications are different but their pay scales are also different and they have been recruited under different sets of recruitment rules. According to him, the kind of expertise, which is used by the Allopathic Doctors to treat variety of diseases including surgical operations, distinguishes them from the Ayurvedic Doctors, whose area and extent of practice is not as extensive as that of Allopathic Doctors. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to similar treatment as Allopathic Doctors in the matter of age of superannuation. It is not necessary for us to dwelve deep in the matter because this issue is no longer res integra and stands concluded by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of North Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs. Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma & Ors (supra) and batch of cases where this issue was examined. While enhancing the age of retirement of Allopathic Doctors from 60 to 62 years, this enhancement had not taken place in respect of the class of Ayurvedic Doctors which resulted in filing of petitions before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held the classification unreasonable and the petitions were allowed. The matter was taken to the Hon’ble Supreme Court by the employer namely North Delhi Municipal Corporation. Their Lordships in the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as below:-

“22. The common contention of the appellants before us is that classification of AYUSH doctors and doctors under CHS in different categories is reasonable and permissible in law. This however does not appeal to us and we are inclined to agree with the findings of the Tribunal and the Delhi High Court that the classification is discriminatory and unreasonable since doctors under both segments are performing the same function of treating and healing their patients. 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