New Delhi: The Union Government has strongly defended its decision to reduce the qualifying percentile for NEET-PG 2025, asserting before the Supreme Court that the move does not compromise the competence of doctors or endanger patient safety. In an affidavit filed in response to a writ petition challenging the reduction, the Centre clarified that NEET-PG is not a test of minimum clinical competence but a ranking mechanism used solely for allocating a limited number of postgraduate medical seats.
The affidavit, submitted by Dr Praveen Kumar Dass, Assistant Director General (Medical Education) in the Directorate General of Health Services under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, emphasised that the minimum standard of medical competence is already established at the undergraduate level through the MBBS degree. According to the Centre, all candidates appearing for NEET-PG are licensed MBBS doctors who have completed 4.5 years of formal medical education across 16–17 modern medical specialties, followed by a mandatory one-year rotating internship.
“NEET-PG is not to certify minimum competence, which stands established by the MBBS qualification itself,” the affidavit stated, adding that the examination merely generates an inter se merit list for the allocation of postgraduate seats. The government further argued that NEET-PG scores reflect relative performance influenced by examination design and negative marking, and therefore cannot be treated as a reliable indicator of clinical incompetence.
Addressing concerns raised about patient safety, the Centre maintained that such apprehensions are misplaced. It pointed out that MBBS graduates are legally entitled to practice modern medicine independently even without postgraduate qualifications. Moreover, during postgraduate training, doctors work under constant supervision of senior faculty and specialists in a structured three-year program. Final competence, the affidavit noted, is rigorously tested through MD/MS exit examinations, where candidates must secure at least 50 per cent marks separately in theory and practical components, with no scope for relaxation.
The decision to reduce the qualifying percentile, the government explained, was taken jointly by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the National Medical Commission (NMC) to prevent large-scale seat vacancies. For the academic session 2025–26, around 70,000 postgraduate medical seats were available nationwide, while 2,24,029 candidates appeared for NEET-PG. Despite this, a significant number of seats remained unfilled after the second round of counselling. Of the 31,742 seats under the All-India Quota (AIQ), 9,621 were vacant after Round 2, including 5,213 seats in government medical colleges, covering AIQ and DNB positions.
Following the reduction in the qualifying percentile for the third round of counselling, an additional 1,00,054 candidates became eligible, increasing the total pool of eligible candidates to 2,28,170. The affidavit highlighted that after the completion of Round 3 of AIQ counselling, only 2,988 seats remained vacant, which will be offered in the subsequent round.
The Centre also underscored that reducing the qualifying percentile is not an unprecedented step. Since the introduction of NEET-PG in 2017, percentile reductions have been implemented in exceptional circumstances to avoid seat wastage. Notably, in the 2023 academic year, the qualifying percentile was reduced to zero across all categories. The government argued that such decisions fall squarely within the domain of policy-making and are not subject to judicial interference unless proven to be manifestly arbitrary, mala fide, or violative of constitutional or statutory provisions.
Highlighting the broader implications, the affidavit stressed that postgraduate medical seats represent a substantial national investment in terms of infrastructure, faculty, and hospital facilities. Leaving these seats vacant would amount to wastage of public resources and adversely affect specialist healthcare delivery in the country. The reduction of the qualifying percentile, the Centre argued, is a proportionate administrative measure aimed at strengthening healthcare capacity while maintaining merit-based seat allocation.
Importantly, the government clarified that even after lowering the cut-off, seat allotment continues strictly on the basis of merit and candidate preferences. The measure does not alter inter se merit rankings nor provide undue advantage to any institution or category of candidates.
Concluding its submission, the Centre stated that the policy aligns with the national objective of expanding access to quality healthcare and ensuring optimal utilisation of medical training capacity. The matter is currently under consideration by the Supreme Court, which will examine whether the challenged notification issued by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences on January 13, 2026, warrants judicial intervention.
