Ayurveda Doctors to be paid equal to Allopathy Doctors: Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has recently upheld the Uttarakhand High Court's order that Ayurvedic doctors are entitled to a salary that is in parity with the Allopathic Medical Officers and Dental Medical Officers under the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM/NHM) Scheme.

The Medical Dialogues team had earlier reported about the Uttarakhand High Court's direction to the state government asking it to pay the Ayurvedic medical practitioners in the state on par with their Allopathic counterparts. The petition was filed by Dr. Sanjay Singh Chauhan along with 101 others.

According to a recent report by Livelaw, the top court refused to entertain the plea which had challenged the order of the High Court. The two-judge bench of Justices Vineet Saran and J.K. Maheshwari, however, observed, "However, we may only clarify that the respondents who are Ayurvedic doctors will be entitled to be treated at par with Allopathic Medical Officers and Dental Medical Officers under the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM/NHM) Scheme."

The union government had launched the National Rural Health Mission ("NRHM"), which is a sub-mission of the National Health Mission ("NHM") in 2015 with its aim to provide accessible, affordable, and quality health care to the rural population. The respondents then were appointed as medical officers, Ayush on a contract basis between 2010 and 2013 under the mission in the Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram (RBSK).

The Uttarakhand state government-appointed Allopathic, Dental, Ayurvedic, and Homeopathic Medical Officers under the NRHM on a contractual basis. However, there is a significant disparity in the salary of the Allopathic and Dental Doctors and that of Ayurvedic and Homeopathic Doctors. The Ayurvedic medical officers, who are the respondents had made representations asking for parity in salary, but their efforts went in vain. The authorities in turn rejected their representation stating that they are not entitled to parity since they were working on a contract basis.

The respondents then eventually approached the Uttarakhand High Court. The ayurvedic medical officers argued that according to the advertisement issued by the Government in 2010, there was no difference in salary between the Allopathic Medical Officers and Ayurvedic Medical Officers. Further, they argued that the Ayurvedic and Allopathic Medical Officers discharged similar duties.

The high court had observed that was no intelligible differentia to consider the Ayurvedic and Homeopathic Medical Officers as a different class from the Allopathic and Dental Medical Officers, stating, "There is no intelligible differentia so as to distinguish the Ayurvedic and Homeopathic Medical Officers viz-a-viz Allopathic and Dental Medical Officers. There is no rational why similar situate persons have been discriminated against. The petitioners, as well as Allopathic and Dental Medical Officer, constitute a homogenous class."

Further, the court noted that the nature of degrees and duration of courses were almost the same, and hence cannot be classified separately. It cited a judgment Bhagwan Dass and Others v. State of Haryana And Ors. (1987) 4 SCC 643 in which the court had stated that when duties and functions of temporary appointees and employees of the regular cadre in the same Government Department are similar, parity in respect of salary cannot be denied based merely on the nature of their appointment.

The court also relied on the judgment produced by the Apex Court in State of Punjab v. Jagjit Singh And Ors. (2017) 1 SCC 148, where the court had said that the 'equal pay for equal work' principle is vested in every employee, irrespective of their nature of the appointment.

Subsequently, the high court allowed the petition filed by the respondents, where they granted parity in salary while observing that the classification made by the state government was irrational.

The high court had said, "In the instant case, the duties discharged by the petitioners viz-a-viz Allopathic Medical Officers and Dental Medical Officers are of equal sensitivity and quality, even the responsibility and reliability are the same. The classification made by the State Government is irrational."