The Supreme Court on October 17, 2025, referred to a larger Bench the issue of whether doctors practicing allopathy and those from indigenous systems of medicine, AYUSH can be treated equally for determining service conditions such as retirement age and pay scale.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran observed that there exists ambiguity regarding parity between practitioners of different systems, particularly concerning retirement age and pay packages. The Court noted that the matter should be evaluated on parameters such as qualification, nature of duties, and the kind of medical services rendered.
The Court reviewed prior rulings NDMC v. Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma (2021) 17 SCC 642, State of Gujarat v. Dr. P.A. Bhatt (2023) SCC Online SC 503, and Dr. Solamon A. v. State of Kerala, Special Leave Petition (C) No.3946 of 2023 which had taken divergent stands. While Ram Naresh Sharma recognized parity between AYUSH and allopathy doctors for retirement age, P.A. Bhatt and subsequent cases distinguished the two based on differences in qualifications, responsibilities, and the nature of clinical work.
Highlighting that allopathy doctors handle trauma, critical care, and surgical procedures tasks not performed by AYUSH practitioners, the Court held that these distinctions justify different service conditions in the interest of public health and administrative efficiency.
Pending a final decision, the Bench allowed States to continue AYUSH doctors beyond their prescribed retirement age up to that applicable to allopathy doctors, but only on half pay. If the larger Bench eventually rules in favour of AYUSH practitioners, they will be entitled to full pay and allowances for that period.