THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY Writ Petition No.19025 of 2025

ORDER:

(Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)

Aggrieved by the order dated 22.12.2023 passed in O.A.No.29 of 2023 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), the present Writ Petition is filed.

2. Heard Ms. L. Pranathi Reddy, learned counsel representing learned Additional Solicitor General, appearing for the petitioners.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had contended that the respondent is the ‘National Federation of pensioners of AYUSH Councils’ (NFPAC), which looks after the welfare of the pensioners and family pensioners. The respondent was contending that the Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) benefits were not extended to the retired employees i.e., all the pensioners and the family pensioners. When the case of the respondent-Federation was not considered by the petitioners, the respondent-Federation had approached the Tribunal by filing O.A.No.29 of 2023, contending that earlier, the Tribunal had decided a similar matter concerning one of the five research councils under the Ministry of AYUSH, namely, the Central Council for Research in Unani Medicine (CCRUM), Hyderabad, where similarly situated persons had filed O.A.No.692 of 2017 and the said O.A. was disposed of by the Tribunal on 14.08.2019. Challenging the said O.A., the Union Government had filed W.P.No.5298 of 2021 before the High Court and the same was dismissed on 13.07.2021 confirming the order, dated 14.08.2019 passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.692 of 2017.

4. Learned counsel further contended that the Tribunal, in its earlier decision regarding the Council for Research in Unani Medicine, had erroneously allowed the O.A. in favour of the retired employees, without appreciating the fact that the retired employees have not contributed anything to the CGH Scheme. Since the retired employees had not made any contribution to the CGHS, and as the Federation is not covered under the Scheme, the extension of CGHS benefits to them would not arise. This fact was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal on the earlier occasion, hence, Tribunal had erroneously decided O.A.No.692 of 2017. Learned counsel had further contended that the respondent-Federation has filed the Contempt Petition before the Tribunal, which is listed today ‘for compliance’. If the orders passed by the Tribunal are not set aside, the petitioners would be put to irreparable loss and hardship. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the Writ Petition by setting aside the order dated 22.12.2023 passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.29 of 2023 and allow the Writ Petition.

5. This Court, having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, is of the view that the Tribunal in O.A.No.692 of 2017 had already adjudicated the issue and passed the order on 14.08.2019, holding that retired employees of the Unani stream under the Ministry of AYUSH (similarly situated persons) are entitled to CGHS benefits and the said order was upheld by the High Court in W.P.No.5298 of 2021 vide order, dated 13.07.2021. When the Unani Department of AYUSH was already held to be covered under the CGHS as per the Tribunal’s order, which was confirmed by the High Court, the Tribunal was justified in allowing O.A. No. 29 of 2023 in favour of the respondent-Federation. If the arguments of the petitioner are to be accepted, then it would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, as it would result in differential treatment of similarly situated persons. The respondent-Federation also falls under the Ministry of AYUSH, which encompasses Ayurveda and other allied Indian medicine systems. Hence, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the subject O.A. in favour of the respondent. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the orders passed by the Tribunal. However, the pet