The Union Health Ministry has strongly defended its controversial decision to lower the minimum qualifying percentile for the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test-Postgraduate (NEET-PG) 2025 counselling before the Supreme Court of India. Amid widespread criticism from doctors, students, and civil society, the government maintained that a reduced cut-off “does not certify incompetence” and will not harm overall medical standards.
Why Was the Cut-off Reduced?
The Centre told the apex court that the move was prompted by a huge number of vacant postgraduate medical seats — including more than 9,600 unfilled under the All India Quota (AIQ) and significant vacancies in government medical colleges. Rather than let these seats go unfilled, the authorities lowered the qualifying percentile — in some cases to nearly zero — to expand the pool of eligible candidates.
Officials emphasised that NEET-PG is primarily a merit ranking tool for allocating limited seats, not a direct test of clinical competence. Since candidates already hold an MBBS degree and have completed internships, the government argued that basic competence is already established before postgraduate training begins.
Concerns Over Medical Education Quality
However, petitioners — represented by senior legal counsel — argued that reducing eligibility criteria midway through counselling violates established legal norms and threatens the quality of medical training. They warned that admitting candidates with single-digit or even negative scores could dilute standards and negatively impact patient safety once these graduates begin clinical practice.
The Supreme Court bench, led by Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, expressed concern about whether the drastic cut-off change might affect the quality of education and training provided in postgraduate programmes. The court asked the Centre to justify how such changes would not compromise standards and adjourned further hearings to review evidence and stakeholder arguments.
What Happens Next?
The Supreme Court has scheduled follow-up hearings to examine the implications of the cut-off reduction on both medical education quality and broader public health concerns. Legal scrutiny will continue as stakeholders present detailed arguments on merit, patient safety, and regulatory authority in setting eligibility norms for medical postgraduate admissions.
