Supreme Court Deliberates on Retirement Age Parity for AYUSH and Allopathic Doctors

The Supreme Court is assessing whether doctors of modern medicine and AYUSH practitioners should have different superannuation ages. Various petitions and appeals focus on perceived discrimination against AYUSH practitioners, as some states raised retirement ages for allopathic doctors to address shortages.

The Supreme Court has reserved its verdict on a crucial issue regarding the retirement age of doctors in modern medicine and AYUSH disciplines. The court is deliberating the fairness of having different superannuation ages, a concern raised by numerous petitions, including those from states like Rajasthan.

Rajasthan's decision to increase the retirement age for allopathic doctors from 60 to 62, citing a shortage, prompted similar demands from AYUSH practitioners. The Rajasthan High Court ruled in favor of AYUSH doctors, deeming retirement age discrepancies unconstitutional and reinstating specific practitioners.

The state government challenged this High Court decision, emphasizing the distinct need for allopathic doctors. However, AYUSH doctors argue that their treatment role justifies equal retirement terms. The Supreme Court's forthcoming decision will address whether this issue requires a broader judicial examination.

(With inputs from agencies.)