The Supreme Court has reiterated that Ayurveda practitioners cannot claim parity with allopathic doctors, emphasizing the distinct nature of their medical training and practice.
In a recent judgment, the court highlighted the qualitative differences in academic qualifications and standards between allopathic and Ayurvedic medicine. Citing past precedents, the court emphasized that allopathic doctors handle a greater patient volume, including complex surgeries and emergency situations, which distinguishes their workload from that of Ayurveda practitioners.
This ruling reaffirms the distinct roles and responsibilities of allopathic and Ayurvedic practitioners within the healthcare system.
Key Takeaways:
- No Parity: Ayurveda practitioners cannot claim parity with allopathic doctors in terms of pay, responsibilities, or professional standing.
- Distinct Roles: The court recognized the unique roles and responsibilities of both systems of medicine.
- Focus on Quality: The judgment underscores the importance of maintaining distinct academic standards and training for each medical discipline.
This decision has significant implications for the ongoing debate surrounding the integration of different systems of medicine within the Indian healthcare system.