New Delhi, Feb 4 The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice on a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the decision of the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) to drastically reduce the qualifying cut-off percentiles for the NEET-PG 2025–26 examination.
A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe sought responses from the Union of India, NBEMS, the National Medical Commission (NMC) and the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) and posted the matter for further hearing on February 6.
The PIL challenged the impugned notification dated January 13, issued by NBEMS, whereby the qualifying cut-off percentiles for postgraduate medical admissions were reduced to abnormally low, zero and even negative levels after the declaration of results and completion of two rounds of counselling.
According to the petition, the cut-off for General and EWS candidates was lowered from the originally prescribed 50th percentile (276 marks out of 800) to the 7th percentile (approximately 120 marks), while for SC, ST and OBC candidates, the qualifying percentile was reduced from the 40th percentile (235 marks) to zero percentile, permitting eligibility even with negative scores.
The plea, filed by advocate Satyam Singh Rajput, contends that the impugned reduction is arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, and poses a serious threat to patient safety, public health and the integrity of postgraduate medical education.
It argues that permitting candidates with zero or negative scores to enter specialist training dilutes merit at the apex level of medical education and undermines minimum standards of professional competence.
Terming the move “unprecedented and extreme”, the petition states that NEET-PG, which is meant to function as a national screening mechanism, has been converted into “an instrument certifying failure as eligibility”.
The petitioners have also challenged the reduction on the ground that the “rules of the game” cannot be altered after the selection process has commenced and results have been declared.
It further alleges that the decision amounts to impermissible executive interference in academic standards, asserting that under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019, the responsibility to maintain professional standards lies with the NMC as an expert body, and cannot be subordinated to administrative or seat-filling considerations.
Seeking quashing of the impugned notification, the petitioners have urged the apex court to restore constitutionally permissible minimum qualifying standards and issue appropriate directions to safeguard patient safety, public health and the rule of law.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor