2018 (11) TMI 1950 - HC - Indian Laws

Extension of retirement age - HELD THAT - Even though the Government of India initially did not extend its policy decision to enhance the retirement age of allopathic doctors to other medical streams, such as Ayurvedic doctors subsequently, it has taken the decision on 24.11.2017 to enhance the age of retirement of those doctors who are covered by AYUSH (which includes the Ayurvedic doctors, as well as those practising Unani, Homeopathy etc.) The subsequent decision dated 24.11.2017 has been made effective only from 27.09.2017. Pertinently, the NDMC has followed suit, and the said Governmental decision has been adopted by it. Thus, those Ayurvedic doctors of the NDMC who fall in the window before 31.05.2016 and 26.09.2017 are left out from getting the benefit of the enhancement of age of retirement, while those retiring on or after 27.09.2017 would get the benefit of the retirement age enhancement to 65 years. Those Ayurvedic doctors, who continued to remain in service on or after 27.09.2017, have been extended the benefit of their age of retirement being raised like the other Allopathic doctors (GDMOs) to 65 years. Qua the said private respondents, the present petitions are accordingly dismissed. So far as the case of respondent No.2 Dr. Pratibha Sharma in WP(C) 8704 of 2017 is concerned, it is found that she is an employee of EDMC and apparently the EDMC has not adopted the Government Resolution dated 24.11.2017. The present petition has been preferred by the NDMC. Therefore, in the present petition, respondent No.2 Dr. Pratibha Sharma need not have been impleaded as a party respondent, since the NDMC has no concern with her - it is left open to the EDMC to deal with her case in the manner it considers appropriate. The NDMC is directed to make payment of the arrears of salary and allowances to those of the respondent-doctors, who continued to serve with the NDMC even after attaining the age of 60 years and who are still in employment with NDMC, within four weeks from today and to continue to make payment of their salary and other allowances in future punctually till they superannuate at the age of 65 years. However, it is made clear that respondents shall not be assigned any administrative duties in terms of the Governmental decision. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Applicability of retirement age enhancement to Ayurvedic doctors.
2. Constitutionality of preferential treatment towards Allopathic doctors.
3. Implementation of government decision on retirement age enhancement.
4. Dismissal of petitions and payment of arrears to respondent-doctors.

Issue 1: Applicability of retirement age enhancement to Ayurvedic doctors
The High Court addressed the issue of retirement age enhancement for Ayurvedic doctors following a government order raising the age of superannuation for Allopathic doctors. The Tribunal held that Ayurvedic doctors were entitled to similar treatment in terms of retirement age as Allopathic doctors under the Central Health Scheme (CHS). Consequently, the Ayurvedic doctors were granted the benefit of extending their retirement age to 65 years, with a direction for reinstatement if retired at 60 years.

Issue 2: Constitutionality of preferential treatment towards Allopathic doctors
The Tribunal found the preferential treatment of Allopathic doctors under CHS over Ayurvedic doctors unconstitutional, violating Article 14 of the Constitution. It held that all medical professionals, including Ayurvedic doctors, should receive similar treatment regarding service conditions and retirement age. The High Court upheld this decision, emphasizing the need for equal treatment across medical streams.

Issue 3: Implementation of government decision on retirement age enhancement
Following the Tribunal's decision, the Government of India issued an order enhancing the retirement age of AYUSH doctors, including Ayurvedic doctors, to 65 years. The High Court noted that this decision was effective from a specific date, leaving some Ayurvedic doctors out of the enhanced retirement age benefit. The NDMC adopted this government decision, extending the retirement age for Ayurvedic doctors falling within the specified window.

Issue 4: Dismissal of petitions and payment of arrears to respondent-doctors
The High Court dismissed the petitions challenging the retirement age enhancement for Ayurvedic doctors, except for one respondent working with the EDMC. It declined to interfere with the impugned order for Ayurvedic doctors serving with the NDMC who retired during the period before the government's decision took effect. The Court directed the NDMC to pay arrears to respondent-doctors who continued to serve after attaining 60 years until the age of 65, with a prohibition on assigning administrative duties as per the government decision.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues addressed by the High Court regarding the retirement age enhancement for Ayurvedic doctors, the constitutionality of preferential treatment, the implementation of government decisions, and the dismissal of petitions with instructions for payment of arrears to respondent-doctors.