The Madhya Pradesh High Court has imposed an interim stay on the recruitment process for AYUSH medical officers, including Ayurveda, Homeopathy and Unani doctors, in the state. The order was passed by the Jabalpur bench of the High Court while hearing petitions challenging the denial of reservation benefits to contractual doctors who have completed five years of continuous service.

The matter has emerged as a major India News Update related to government recruitment and reservation policy in Madhya Pradesh. The decision is expected to affect the ongoing recruitment process conducted through the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission (MPPSC).

The division bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf issued notices to the state government and the MPPSC seeking their response in the matter. During the hearing, the state government requested additional time to file its reply before the court. Representing the state, the Additional Advocate General sought two days’ time to submit the response, which was accepted by the bench. The next hearing in the case has been scheduled for June 23, 2026.

The High Court, while passing the interim order, stayed all further proceedings related to the recruitment advertisements issued on December 31, 2025. This means the appointment process for AYUSH medical officers will remain suspended until further directions from the court. According to the petitions filed before the court, contractual AYUSH doctors who completed five years of continuous service were not being granted the benefit of 50 percent reservation in the regular recruitment process.

The petitioners argued that the state government itself had issued a notification on March 11, 2025, providing reservation benefits to contractual medical officers working in Ayurveda, Homeopathy and Unani departments after completion of five years of service, provided they were working on equivalent posts. However, despite the notification, the recruitment advertisements issued by MPPSC allegedly failed to extend the reservation benefit to eligible contractual doctors.

Senior advocate Naman Nagarath, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, argued before the court that all contractual AYUSH doctors were already performing duties on the same posts for which recruitment had been announced. He submitted that the only difference between contractual and regular officers was related to salary structure and service conditions. Denying reservation benefits solely on the basis of different pay scales was unjustified and contrary to the government notification, he argued.

During the hearing, the petitioners’ counsel also referred to an earlier contempt case in which the state government had reportedly acknowledged that the AYUSH department approached the National Health Commission seeking parity in salary structure for contractual doctors. The petitioners claimed this itself established that contractual doctors were functioning on equivalent posts and therefore deserved reservation benefits under the notified policy.

The court’s interim order has brought temporary relief to thousands of contractual AYUSH doctors working across Madhya Pradesh. Many of these doctors have been demanding implementation of reservation benefits in regular appointments for several years. Medical associations and contractual employees’ groups welcomed the High Court’s intervention and said the decision has provided hope to doctors serving in remote and rural areas under contractual arrangements.

Several AYUSH doctors stated that despite years of service in government health facilities, they were not receiving the same opportunities and benefits available to regular employees. They argued that the reservation policy announced by the state government should be implemented uniformly during recruitment. The recruitment process had been initiated to fill vacant posts in Ayurveda, Homeopathy and Unani departments across the state. Officials said the appointments were aimed at strengthening healthcare services, especially in rural and semi-urban regions where AYUSH services remain in high demand.

Legal experts believe the outcome of the case could have wider implications for future government recruitment policies involving contractual employees in Madhya Pradesh. The dispute has also raised broader questions regarding service parity and reservation eligibility for long-serving contractual workers. Observers noted that the High Court’s order reflects the judiciary’s focus on ensuring that recruitment rules and government notifications are implemented fairly and consistently.

The state government is now expected to present its detailed stand regarding the recruitment policy and reservation provisions during the next hearing. The court’s final decision may determine how reservation benefits are extended to contractual AYUSH doctors in future recruitment drives.

----------