Dr. Mukesh Kaveeshwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 872 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Dr. Mukesh Kaveeshwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 May, 2025

                                                           1                               WP-18449-2025
                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                   WP No. 18449 of 2025
                                (DR. MUKESH KAVEESHWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS )



                         Dated : 17-05-2025
                              Shri Rohit Jain - Advocate for petitioner.

                              Learned"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar
                         facts and circumstances, this Hon'ble Court has granted interim relief in
                         W.P. No.13738/2025 by order dated 30.04.2025, which reads as under:"

                              ''The present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

                             "(i) It is most humbly prayed that appropriate writ/order/direction
                             be issued to declare Sub-rule (1-c)/(a) of the impugned
                             notification dated 06.05.2011 (Annexure P/1) bearing number
                             2832-178-21-A-(Pra.) as ultra virus due to the exclusionary
                             character of leaving out Government Doctors of
                             Ayush/Department.

                             (ii) That, it is further prayed that appropriate/ Writ/ Order be issued
                             to respondent No.1 to include Government Doctors of Ayush

Department in the said notification for getting benefit of increased age of retirement.

(iii) That, it is further prayed that appropriate/ Writ/ Order be issued thereby setting aside the order dated 28.01.2025(Annexure P/5), as far as it relates to the petitioner and directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to work under the Ayush Department to continue till the age of 65 years.

(iv) It is further prayed that respondents kindly be directed to count the petitioner's services up to the age of sixty-five (65)years and be made entitled for all the consequential benefits including arrears.

(v) Any other relief deemed fit and proper be also granted.

(vi) Cost of the petition."

2 WP-18449-2025

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the nonapplicant/respondent-State has opposed the present application by submitting that its a policy decision of the State and cannot be interfered by this Court. Moreover, in case of Dr. Solamon A Vs. State of Kerala passed in SLP(C) No.3946/2023, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the case of State of Gujarat and others Vs. Dr. P.A. Bhatt and others (2023) 15 SCC 257 has dismissed the SLP by stating that there cannot be parity with the Ayush Doctors and the Allopathic Doctors.

3. Learned Counsel for the respondent/State fairly stated that in case of Dr. P.A. Bhatt (supra) which is of April 2023, issue was pay parity whereas in case of Dr. Solamon A (supra) regarding the age of retirement from 56 to 60 years for Ayush Doctors whereas for the Allopathic Doctors, the age was already 60 years of retirement. But the fact remains that Coordinate Bench at Indore in WP No.3043/2025 vide order dated 30/01/2025 has held that the Ayush Doctors (petitioner therein) is also to continue till the age of 65 years at par with the Allopathic Doctor. Whereas, the counsel for the applicant has heavily relied upon the order dated 30/01/2024 passed in I.A. No.182071/2022 in SLP No.14308- 14318/2022 filed by the respondents therein, the Hon'ble Supreme by considering the judgment of Ayush Doctor in North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma & Ors. reported in (2021) 17 SCC 642 held as under:

Heard Dr. Manish Singhvi, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner(s) - State of Rajasthan. Also heard Mr. Adeel Ahmed, Mr. Puneet Jain and Mr. Manish Verma, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, learned counsel appears for the applicant in application(s) for impleadment.

2. IA Nos. 66651 of 2023, 96650 of 2023 and 100293 of 2023 (applications for impleadment) are allowed.

3. The counsel for the State of Rajasthan submits that since there is shortage of Allopathic doctors serving under the Rajasthan Government, a decision was taken to raise the retirement age of Allopathic doctors from 60 years to 62 years. However, since there were large number of Ayush doctors serving with the State Government, similar raising of retirement age for Ayush doctors was not considered necessary by the Government. Dr. Singhvi

3 WP-18449-2025 would then argue that different retirement age for the Allopathic doctors and the Ayush doctors would not attract the argument of discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution.

4. The impugned judgment rendered by the High Court granting parity relief to the Ayush doctors was based on the judgment of this Court in North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma & Ors. reported in (2021) 17 SCC 642. In this case, the Court noted that the doctors, both under the Ayush and Allopathic stream, render service to patients and on this core aspect, there is nothing to distinguish one from the other.

5. The records would show that the above decision of this Court was followed by the High Courts in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Uttarakhand. The like decision taken by the High Court of Rajasthan favouring the Ayush doctors in raising their retirement age to 62 years, is under challenge here.

6. It is relevant to note that this Court on 24.03.2022 has dismissed the State's appeal in SLP (Civil) No. 33645 of 2018 arising out of the judgment dated 03.04.2018 rendered by the High Court of Uttarakhand in the WP No. 484 of 2014.

7. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel and the reasoning given by this Court in Dr. Ram Naresh Sharma (supra) are carefully considered. No infirmity is found with the impugned judgment dated 13.07.2022 whereunder parity relief on retirement age was granted to the Ayush doctors. The Special Leave Petitions are accordingly dismissed.

4. In view of the order of Supreme Court dated 30/01/2024 and the Coordinate Bench at Indore as noted above, we hereby are of the view that the applicant/petitioner and similarly situated Ayush Doctors shall continue till the age of 65 years at par with the Allopathic Doctors, however, this order shall be subject to the final outcome of the present writ petition.

5. We hereby make it clear that since the writ petitions are pending those who are already retired, this order will not be applicable in those cases and if those petitioners succeed in their petitions, they will get the benefits accordingly.

List along with W.P. No.2154 of 2025.''

4 WP-18449-2025 The order passed in W.P. No.13738/2025 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case as well.

List the matter along with W.P. No.13738/2025.

                             (SURESH KUMAR KAIT)                                    (VIVEK JAIN)
                                 CHIEF JUSTICE                                         JUDGE
                         Praveen