Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench recently allowed a writ petition moved by qualified AYUSH doctors, working under the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) Scheme as contractual employees, whose honorarium had not been revised at par with the increase in honorarium of Allopathic Medical Officers. 

The bench of Justice Alok Mathur held that the mode of treatment, by itself does not qualify as an intelligible differentia as at the root of the medical service is the treatment of patients which Medical officers of both Ayurvedic and Allopathy render to the patients, and on this aspect, there is nothing to distinguish them.

"Treatment of patients is the core function common to the Medical Officers of different streams, therefore, no rational justification is seen to having different ACP (Assured Career Progression) scheme of bestowing the benefit of career progression to Medical Officers," the court said. 

Essentially, the writ petition was moved by one Dr. Ram Suresh Rai and 28 others, who were aggrieved by the order passed by the Principal Secretary, Medical and Health Department, Government of U.P., Lucknow on March 29, 2019, rejecting their representation for being granted equivalent honorarium as is being given to the Allopathic doctors.

The petitioners, who had been engaged as AYUSH doctors on a contract basis and were posted in different districts in the State of Uttar Pradesh having their services renewed from time to time, informed the court that till the year 2009-10, honorarium for all Medical Officers i.e. Allopathic, BDS Doctors as well as AYUSH Doctors, was proposed to be Rs.24,000 per month but later on, the honorarium of Medical Officers-Allopathic was increased under Dynamic/Special Assured Career Progression (SACP) scheme and the same was denied to others. 

Thereafter, despite two writ petitions before the high court, the Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare, U.P. rejected the representations for an equal honorarium for all doctors viz. Allopathic/Ayurvedic /Unani/Dental employed under the NRHM scheme, the petitioners submitted.

Regarding the rejection of petitioners' claim, the counsel for the state submitted that "the qualification of the Medical Officers of different streams is not comparable; the nature of duties, responsibility and treatment is entirely different; the Medical Officers of other streams, including, Medical Officers (Ayurvedic) are not engaged in Medico-Legal work and the Medical Officers PMHS perform complicated surgery and they are not paid Non-Practising Allowance (NPA), whereas, the petitioners, Medical Officers (Ayurvedic), are allowed private practice".

In this backdrop, he submitted that the SACP scheme was formulated in respect of a class of Medical Officers, excluding, Medical Officers of other streams and the petitioners had not been discriminated against as they are entitled to ACP Scheme as is applicable to all the employees of the State Government vide Government Order dated 04.05.2010.

The court observed that the ACP scheme is a scheme applicable across the board from Class-D employee to the highest rank officer, wherever such government servant suffers stagnation, however, an exception has been carved out for the Medical Officers, PMHS while implementing SACP. 

Court opined that this deprivation of SACP for the other Medical Officers practicing medicine in different streams was discriminatory. 

"Admittedly, the Medical Officers, irrespective of the stream of medicine (Allopathy or conventional) treat the patients which is the core underlying similarity. The comparison with regard to qualification, course of study/syllabus, nature of duty, responsibility etc. as is being pressed by the State Government to carve out a class of Medical Officers i.e. PHMS being superior to other Medical Officers is misconceived and unfounded insofar it relates to conferment of SACP," the court held. 

Accordingly, while allowing the instant writ petition, court quashed the impugned order and directed that the Special ACP Scheme (SACP) implemented vide Government Order dated 14 November 2014, shall be applicable to the Medical Officers of other streams also.

Case Title: Dr. Ram Suresh Rai And 28 Ors. v. U.O.I. Thru Secy. Health And Family Welfare Nirman N.Delhiandors