-1771474187884.webp)
NEET PG 2025: The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) has informed the Supreme Court (SC) that a total of 95,913 additional candidates have been considered eligible for National Eligibility cum Entrance Test - Postgraduate (NEET- PG) 2025 counselling. These candidates have been considered eligible after the qualifying cut-off percentile was reduced.
NBEMS Affidavit Before the Supreme Court:
In an affidavit filed with the Supreme Court, the examination body stated that "it is prima facie clear" that lowering the cut-off has significantly increased the pool of eligible candidates. The board warned that any judicial intervention at this stage would directly impact these candidates, many of whom are about to participate in the third round of counseling.
The affidavit clarified that NBEMS had no role in the decision to lower the cut-off. According to the board, this decision falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS), the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, and the National Medical Commission.
Background of the Controversy and Court Proceedings:
The controversy stems from a petition challenging the "significant reduction" in the qualifying percentile for NEET-PG 2025–26 admissions. A bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe issued notices to the Center, NBEMS, the National Medical Commission, and others on February 4, seeking their responses. With over 18,000 postgraduate medical seats lying vacant across the country, authorities have revised the cut-off criteria.
The qualifying percentile for the general category has been reduced from 50 to 7, while for the reserved category, it has been reduced from 40 to zero. This move allows candidates with very low scores—including negative marks—to participate in the counselling process.
Petitioners' Arguments and the Road Ahead:
The petitioners, including social worker Harisharan Devgan and doctors Saurav Kumar, Lakshya Mittal, and Akash Soni, have argued that this reduction violates Articles 14 ( equality before the law and equal protection of laws) and Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) of the Constitution, stating that it undermines merit and compromises the standard of medical education.
The matter is expected to be heard further as the court weighs the legality of the decision against the need to fill vacant postgraduate medical seats.