[2025:RJ-JP:42921-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16088/2025 Dr. Mahesh Chandra Tripathi Son Of Shri Laxmi Narayan Tripathi, Aged About 69 Years, Resident Of 14/70, Water Works Colony, Bandikui, Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur 2. The Principal Secretary, Ayurved And Bhartiya Chikitsa Vibhag, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. Dy. Secretary, Ayurved And Bhartiya Chikitsa Vibhag, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur 4. Director, Homeopathic Chikitsa Vibhag, Ayush Bhavan, Sector-26, N.r.i. Circle, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nitesh Kumar Garg For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, AAG assisted by Mr. Samee Khan, Mr. Vishnu Dutt Sharma, Ms. Sunita Meena, Ms. Epsa Nangalia & Mr. Shivam Chauhan Ms. Mahi Yadav, AAG assisted by Mr. Aditya Godara, Ms. Yuvika Pilania & Mr. Rohan Mittal HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Order 27/10/2025 1. Issue notice to the respondents. [2025:RJ-JP:42921-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-16088/2025] 2. Ms. Mahi Yadav, learned Additional Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1. 3. Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 4. 4. Keeping in view the order dated 17.10.2025 passed in Special Leave Petition (C) No.9563/2024 titled as State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Anisur Rahman, we dispose of this writ petition in the terms as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court which reads as under: “10. In the meanwhile, the States and the authorities would be entitled to either continue the practitioners of indigenous systems of medicine, even after the age of superannuation specified for them till the age of superannuation provided for MBBS doctors, without the benefit of regular pay and allowances. Eventually, if the larger Bench holds in favour of the AYUSH doctors, entitling them for enhancement in retirement age, the practitioners would be entitled to avail pay and allowances during the period theywere continued. However, if they are not allowed to continue by virtue of this order, still they would be entitled to avail the pay and allowances for the enhanced period, if the issue is held in their favour. If the State Government permits such continuance and the individual doctors do not take up such assignment without regular pay and allowances, they would be treated as retired and the fate of this reference will be inconsequential to them. 11. Considering the fact that if the AYUSH doctors are continued, they will not be entitled to pension also, it is directed that they shall be paid half of the pay and allowances, which, if the reference does not yield any favourable orders will be adjusted in their pension or otherwise against the regular pay and allowances.” 5. It is made clear that our earlier order will have no application now in terms of the order dated 17.10.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 6. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Pending application(s) also stand disposed of. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ Rahul/Diksha-11