The Supreme Court on Monday said it will examine whether the sharp reduction in the qualifying percentile for NEET-PG 2025-26 could compromise standards in postgraduate medical education.
According to LiveLaw reports, a bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe was hearing petitions challenging the government’s decision to drastically lower the minimum percentile required for admission to postgraduate medical courses. The Court made it clear that while filling vacant seats is important, maintaining academic standards remains paramount.
Court flags concern over ‘Quality’
As reported by LiveLaw, during the hearing, Justice Narasimha observed that the Court’s primary concern is whether the move adversely affects the quality of education. He noted that, unlike MBBS admissions, candidates appearing for NEET-PG are already qualified doctors. However, even in postgraduate education, competition and merit cannot be ignored.
The bench pointed out that the cut-off in certain categories had been brought down significantly, in some cases to zero percentile and said the government would need to satisfy the Court that such a reduction does not dilute standards.
The matter has been kept part-heard and will be taken up again on March 24.
Government’s stand: seats should not go waste
Representing the Centre, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati told the Court that the decision to reduce the cut-off was taken because a large number of postgraduate seats were going vacant. She argued that NEET-PG is not meant to certify minimum clinical competence, since all candidates have already completed their MBBS degrees and are licensed practitioners.
According to the Centre, the exam’s purpose is to create a merit list for allocating limited seats. It also submitted that postgraduate medical education is a structured three-year supervised programme, with competence ultimately assessed during final MD/MS examinations.
Petitioners raise fee disparity.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for the petitioners, questioned both the steep reduction in percentile and the issue of high private college fees. He pointed out the stark difference between fees charged by government institutions and private medical colleges, arguing that affordability may be one of the reasons why seats remain unfilled, as reported by LiveLaw.
The Court also heard submissions regarding existing regulations on fee fixation in private colleges and whether they are being properly implemented.
What it is all about?
The controversy stems from a January 13, 2026, notice issued by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences reducing the qualifying percentile for the third round of NEET-PG 2025-26 counselling. The cut-off led to the lowering of the general category cut-off from the 50th percentile to single digits, while in some reserved categories, it was lowered to zero percentile.
The petitioners have also submitted that this drastic step is arbitrary and may have a negative effect on the standards of post-graduate medical courses, which may, in turn, affect patient care in the long run.
As the case is still pending, it appears that the Supreme Court is attempting to strike a balance between not allowing the seats to go vacant and not lowering the standards of medical education in India.
