Service Law : Equal Pay – Allopathy doctors and doctors of indigenous medicine-, if can be said to be performing “equal work” so as to be entitled to “equal pay Non-MBBS medical officers seeked extension of the benefit of higher scales of pay on parity with the allopathic doctors on the basis of the recommendations of Tikku Pay Commission – – Held: Classification based upon educational qualification for the grant of higher pay scale, is a valid classification – Both categories of doctors are certainly not performing equal work to be entitled to equal pay. Pay scales – Appointment of officers to the same post in a cadre – Fixation of different scales of pay on the basis of educational qualifications possessed by them – Held: Classification based upon educational qualification for the grant of higher pay scale, is a valid classification – Thus, the classification based upon educational qualification is not violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The classification based upon educational qualification is not violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Hence, the answer to Issue No.1 that Whether different scales of pay can be fixed for officers appointed to the same cadre, on the basis of the educational qualifications possessed by them would be in favour of the State and against the respondents. [Para 37][314-D-E]
1.2 Allopathy doctors are required to perform emergency duties and to provide trauma care. By the very nature of the science that they practice and with the advancement of science and modern medical technology, 23 the emergency duty that Allopathy doctors are capable of performing and the trauma care that they are capable of providing, cannot be performed by Ayurved doctors. [Para 43][316-D-E]
1.3 It is also not possible for Ayurved doctors to assist surgeons performing complicated surgeries, while MBBS doctors can assist. This Court shall not be understood to mean as though one system of medicine is superior to the other. It is not the mandate nor within competence of this Court to assess the relative merits of these two systems of medical sciences. As a matter of fact, this Court is conscious that the history of Ayurveda dates back to several centuries. The Encyclopaedia Britannica states that the golden age of Indian medicine from 800 B.C., till 1000 A.D., was marked by the production of two medical treatises known as “caraka-samhita” and “susruta-samhita”. [Para 44][316E-G]
1.4 Every alternative system of medicine may have its pride of place in history. But today, the practitioners of indigenous systems of medicine do not perform complicated surgical operations. A study of Ayurved does not authorise them to perform these surgeries. [Para 49][319-B-C]
1.5 A post-mortem or autopsy is not carried out by/in the presence of Ayurved doctors. Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19738 deals with the procedure for the police to inquire and report on suicide, etc. Sub-section (3) of Section 174 mandates that the police officer shall, subject to such rules as the State Government may prescribe, forward the dead body, with a view to its being examined, to the nearest Civil Surgeon, or other qualified medical man appointed in this behalf by the State Government, in certain types of cases such as, (i) suicide by a woman within seven years of marriage; (ii) death of a woman within seven years of marriage in certain circumstances; and (iii) cases where there are any doubts regarding the cause of death. Section
176 of Cr.P.C deals with inquiry by Magistrates into cause of death. Sub-section (5) of Section 176 uses similar words namely “Civil Surgeon or other qualified medical man”. The AYUSH doctors are normally not notified as competent to perform postmortem. [Paras 50, 51][319-C-F]
1.6 It is common knowledge that during out-patient days (OPD) in general hospitals in cities/towns, MBBS doctors are ETC.
made to attend to hundreds of patients, which is not the case with Ayurveda doctors. In the comparative chart extracted, the State of Gujarat have claimed that IV injections and ART injections cannot be administered by Ayurved doctors. [Paras 52-53][319F-H]
1.7 Even while recognizing the importance of Ayurved doctors and the need to promote alternative/indigenous systems of medicine, this Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that both categories of doctors are certainly not performing equal work to be entitled to equal pay. Hence, issue No.2 is answered in favour of the appellant-State and against the respondents. [Para 54][320A-B]
1.8 The impugned order of the High Court is liable to be set aside. As a sequitur, the benefits derived by the respondents by virtue of the interim order passed by this Court on 08.09.2014, are liable to be recovered from the respondents. In the normal course, this Court would not have desired to allow the State to effect recovery but for the fact that a few doctors have received and a few have not. Among the Ayurved doctors, a classification cannot be amde between those who have already received some benefits by virtue of the interim order of this Court dated 08.09.2014 and those who have not received such benefits. Moreover, the fundamental principle cannot be overlooked that a benefit derived by an individual by virtue of an interim order passed by a Court cannot be allowed to be retained, if the ultimate outcome of the case went against such a person. [Para 55][320B-E] North Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma 2021 (9) SCALE 47; The State of Mysore vs. P. Narasinga Rao AIR 1968 SC 349 : [1968] SCR 407; Dr. C. Girijambal vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh (1981) 2 SCC 155 : [1981] 2 SCR 782; Mewa Ram Kanojia vs. All India Institute of Medical Sciences (1989) 2 SCC 235 : [1989] 1 SCR 957; Shyam Babu Verma vs. Union of India (1994) 2 SCC 521 : [1994] 1 SCR 700; State of Haryana vs. Ram Chander (1997) 5 SCC 253 : [1997] 1 Suppl. SCR 309; Director of Elementary Education, Odisha vs. Pramod Kumar Sahoo (2019) 10 SCC 674 – referred to.
Britannica records in page 776 of Volume-23 (15th Edition); “Man and Medicine - A History” authored by Farokh Erach Udwadia – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.