IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 3266 of 2024 Dr. Satyendra Kumar Singh, son of Baleshwar Singh, residing at Bhelatand, MADA Co-operative Colony, Bhawardaha, District- Dhanbad.. ….Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, office at Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi. 3. The Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority (JMADA) through its Chairman, Office at Luby Circular Road, Hirapur, P.O and P.S and District- Dhanbad. 4. The Managing Director, Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority (JMADA) through its Chairman, Office at Luby Circular Road, Hirapur, P.O and P.S and District- Dhanbad. 5. The Secretary, Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority (JMADA) through its Chairman, Office at Luby Circular Road, Hirapur, P.O and P.S and District- Dhanbad 6. The Accounts Officer, Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority (JMADA) through its Chairman, Office at Luby Circular Road, Hirapur, P.O and P.S and District- Dhanbad, Jharkhand. ….Respondents. ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the petitioner(s): Mr. Sanjay Prasad, Advocate. For resp Nos. 3 to 6: Mr. Santosh Kr. Jha, AC to Mr. Mahavir Pd. Sinha,Advocate For the State: Mr. Manav Poddar, AC to AAG-I. ------ 06/22.01.2025: Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 6.8.2022 (Annexure-10 to the writ petition) passed by respondent No. 5, whereby and whereunder, the prayer of the petitioner for equal pay scale to the petitioner with that of the Allopathic Doctor has been rejected. A further prayer has been made that he may be given the pay scale at par with the State Government Homeopathic Doctor. A prayer also has been made to implement the revision of pay scale as per the recommendation of 6th PRC with effect from 1.1.2006 and give the actual monetary benefit from the said date itself. He lastly prays that all the retiral benefits should be paid considering the earlier benefits, which the petitioner is entitled to. 3. Admittedly the petitioner is a Homeopathic Doctor appointed by Jharia Water Board, which is now known as Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority (JMADA). Admittedly the said Board has a separate pay scale for its employees, which is not at par with the employees of Government. The petitioner was appointed as Homeopathic Doctor in the pay scale of Rs. 580- 10-620-15-770/- on 9.6.1983. The benefit of 5th PRC was given to the petitioner, which came with effect from 1.1.1986 but the actual monetary benefit was given from 1.3.1989. His pay scale was revised to Rs.1200-30-1800/-. He was given the benefit of 6th PRC which came into effect from 1.1.1996 but the monetary benefit was given w.e.f. 1.4.1997 and pay scale was revised to Rs.6,500- 10,500/-. 4. The petitioner claims parity in the pay scale. He claims that the salary of the Allopathic Doctors are being paid in higher scale, which should also be made applicable to the petitioner, who is a Homeopathic Doctor. The petitioner approached the High Court by filing WPS No. 2425 of 2020, which was disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to represent before the authority ventilating his grievance. The petitioner filed a representation, which ultimately stood rejected by the authority on 6.8.2022 (Annexure-10) which resulted in filing of this writ petition. 5. The primary issue in this writ petition is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to get the same pay scale to that of Allopathic Doctor of the State. Admittedly, the petitioner was initially appointed by the Jharia Water Board which is now JMADA. Employee of JMADA have different pay scales, which is not same to that of the government employee. The petitioner was initially appointed in the pay scale of Rs. 580-10-620-15-770/-, which was revised from time to time. The pay scale, which the petitioner was granted is of Homeopathic Doctor, employed in JMADA. 6. The issue as to whether there can be different pay scales between Allopathic Doctors and the other doctors of other indigenous medicine and other Non-MBBS Doctors was considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Gujarat and Ors. Vs. Dr. P.A. Bhatt and Ors., reported in (2023) 15 SCC 257. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while deciding the case distinguished the doctors possessing a degree in Allopathic Medicine vis a vis the doctors possessing a degree in non-Allopathic Medicine. After considering different aspect the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the postmortem or autopsy cannot be carried out by or in presence of non-MBBS Doctor, but only by MBBS Doctors. Ayurveda Doctors are not equipped to assist or perform medical surgeries while MBBS doctor can. 7. In the aforesaid judgment, it was also held that classification based on educational qualification is not in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Further on the point of equal work and equal pay, so far as Allopathic Doctor and Non-Allopathic Doctor is concerned, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment has held that both categories i.e. Allopathic Doctor and non-Allopathic Doctor do not perform equal work to be entitled to receive equal pay. 8. Considering the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, I find that no illegality has been committed in the impugned order dated 6.8.2022 i.e. Annexure-10 of the writ petition. Thus, the petitioner cannot claim, as a matter of right, equal pay scale with that of the Allopathic Doctor. 9. So far as the other benefits of the petitioner i.e. the actual revision 2. and the pay benefit of 6th PRC is concerned, it is for the respondents- JMADA to decide as to whether the petitioner is entitled for the same or not. If the respondent has given the said benefit to all other employees, there is no reason as to why the petitioner will not get the same benefit. 10. With the aforesaid observation and directions, this petition stands disposed of. Anu/-Cp2. (ANANDA SEN, J. ) 3.