NEET PG 2025 Cut-Offs Plunge to Historic Lows, Sparking Medical Community Uproar
A last-minute decision to dramatically lower qualifying thresholds for NEET PG 2025 has ignited one of the fiercest debates in recent memory about merit and governance within India's medical education system. The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences, with approval from the Centre, slashed eligibility percentiles just before Round 3 counselling commenced. This unprecedented move permits even candidates with zero or negative scores to become eligible.
Unprecedented Cut-Off Reductions for All Categories
According to the official NBEMS notification implemented for Round 3 counselling, the changes are sweeping:
- General and EWS candidates saw their percentile requirement drop from the 50th to the 7th percentile. This translates to a cut-off score of approximately 103 out of 800.
- General-PwBD candidates witnessed a reduction from the 45th to the 5th percentile, with a cut-off around 90.
- SC, ST, and OBC candidates, including those with disabilities, now face a 0th percentile requirement. This equates to a cut-off score of -40, meaning candidates with negative marks can technically qualify.
This marks the first time in NEET PG history that individuals with negative scores can be declared eligible. It represents a stark departure from established merit-based thresholds. Authorities emphasize that the change affects eligibility only. The original NEET PG 2025 ranks, declared on August 19, 2025, remain unchanged for seat allocation purposes.
Official Rationale: Filling Thousands of Vacant Seats
NBEMS and government officials have defended the decision as a pragmatic solution to a pressing problem. They cite the need to include more candidates in Round 3 counselling for the 2025-26 academic session due to a large number of unfilled postgraduate seats. Reports indicate India has between 65,000 and 70,000 PG medical seats, with thousands remaining vacant even after two counselling rounds.
Officials argue that leaving these seats empty would weaken the operational capacity of teaching hospitals, especially government institutions that depend heavily on postgraduate residents for clinical services and patient care. They maintain that NEET PG is a ranking examination for already qualified MBBS doctors. Lowering the qualifying percentile merely expands the pool for counselling without altering the core merit-based ranking system for seat allocation.
Medical Community Reacts with Fury and Concern
The decision has provoked strong condemnation from major medical associations, resident doctor bodies, and aspirants. Critics argue administrative convenience is being prioritized over academic rigor and long-term patient safety.
The Federation of All India Medical Association (FAIMA) has labeled the move "unprecedented and illogical." FAIMA President Dr. Rohan Krishnan warned Union Health Minister J.P. Nadda that allowing candidates with negative marks into postgraduate training undermines academic and ethical standards. He expressed concern that this dilution could compromise the quality of future specialists, pose direct risks to patient safety in government hospitals, and set a dangerous precedent for medical education.
Dr. Krishnan also suggested the policy might disproportionately benefit private medical colleges, creating a fee-driven admission system rather than one based on merit.
The Federation of Resident Doctors' Association India (FORDA) issued a press release describing the revised cut-off as turning admissions into "a lottery." FORDA framed this decision as the culmination of multiple governance failures surrounding NEET PG 2025, including opaque processes, undisclosed answer keys, arbitrary centre allocations, and prolonged counselling delays.
FORDA wrote to the Health Minister, stating the move devalues years of preparation by aspirants, undermines meritocracy, and risks eroding public trust in the medical education system. The association also alleged the change disproportionately aids private colleges by enabling lower-scoring candidates to secure seats at high fees.
Public Interest Litigation Reaches the Supreme Court
The controversy has now entered the legal arena. A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the drastic cut-off decrease. Petitioners argue that altering criteria mid-cycle violates principles of fairness, transparency, and predictability essential for large-scale medical entrance exams. They contend the policy undermines merit and could ultimately impact patient safety. Media reports indicate the Supreme Court will hear the case shortly, underscoring the national significance of the issue.
Implications for Students and the Healthcare System
For NEET PG aspirants, the revised cut-offs significantly expand eligibility for Round 3 counselling, bringing a much larger candidate pool into the process. However, since seat allotment still follows the original NEET PG ranks, higher-scoring candidates will retain priority during actual allocation.
Proponents argue the health system benefits by filling long-vacant postgraduate seats, potentially easing resident shortages in teaching hospitals. Critics counter that such sharp reductions in eligibility thresholds compromise the rigor of specialist training. They warn this could, over time, harm the quality of care in an already strained public health system.
The Road Ahead: A Test for Medical Education Governance
The NEET PG cut-off controversy has evolved beyond a simple policy adjustment. It has become a focal point for broader debates about meritocracy, transparency, and good governance in India's medical education policy. As counselling proceeds and the Supreme Court prepares to examine the legal challenge, stakeholders across healthcare and education await a resolution that will shape the future of specialist medical training in the country.
