The recent NEET-PG 2025 counselling has stirred considerable debate, as revised cut-off scores have enabled candidates with surprisingly low marks, even single-digit and negative scores, to secure postgraduate seats in top medical colleges across India. This unprecedented situation has sparked concerns about the potential impact on the quality of medical education and healthcare standards.
Revised Cut-offs and Supreme Court Intervention
The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) significantly reduced the qualifying percentile for NEET-PG 2025, leading to drastically lowered cut-off scores. For the General/EWS category, the cut-off was reduced to 103 out of 800, a steep drop from the previous 276. Even more striking, the cut-off for SC/ST/OBC categories was lowered to -40. This decision meant that candidates with negative scores became eligible for postgraduate admissions.
The Supreme Court has taken cognizance of the matter, expressing concerns about the implications of such low cut-offs. A bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe questioned the rationale behind the decision and directed the Centre and NBEMS to justify the reduction. The court has raised concerns about the potential compromise in standards of postgraduate medical education. The matter is scheduled for further hearing, with the court seeking a detailed affidavit clarifying the basis for lowering the qualifying percentile.
Rationale Behind the Cut-off Reduction
The primary justification offered by the authorities for lowering the cut-offs is to prevent postgraduate medical seats from remaining vacant. With over 18,000 seats reportedly vacant across the country, the decision was aimed at ensuring maximum seat utilization. The argument is that, while the cut-offs have been lowered, the candidates still possess MBBS degrees, making them eligible for postgraduate training.
Concerns and Criticisms
However, the decision has faced strong opposition from various sections of the medical community. Critics argue that allowing candidates with such low scores into postgraduate programs could dilute the quality of healthcare education and compromise patient safety. Concerns have been raised about the competency of candidates who are unable to clear the NEET-PG examination with a reasonable score. Some argue that the reduction is arbitrary and violates the statutory mandate under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019, which obligates regulatory bodies to maintain minimum standards in medical education. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the petitioners challenging the cut-off reduction, argued that the rules allow such reductions only when there are not enough eligible candidates, which he claims is not the case this year.
Implications and the Way Forward
The Supreme Court has acknowledged the competing concerns of preventing seat wastage and maintaining educational standards. The court has emphasized the need for transparency and a balanced approach to ensure that neither objective is compromised. The outcome of the case could significantly impact the ongoing NEET-PG 2025 counselling process and set a precedent for future admissions.
The NEET PG counselling process includes both centralized and state counselling. The Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) conducts counselling for 50% of All India Quota seats, central universities and other institutions. The remaining seats are filled through state counselling. Candidates register online, fill in their choices of colleges and courses, and are allotted seats based on their rank, preferences, and seat availability. The revised cut-offs have expanded the pool of eligible candidates, potentially intensifying competition for seats in popular specialities and institutions.
As the Supreme Court deliberates on the matter, the medical fraternity remains divided, with some supporting the move to fill vacant seats and others raising concerns about the long-term consequences for medical education and healthcare in India.