The Supreme Court said the drastic reduction in NEET-PG qualifying percentile raises serious concerns about medical education standards. The Court will now examine the validity of the Centre’s decision lowering the cut-off.
The Supreme Court of India on Monday expressed serious concern over the Central government’s decision to drastically reduce the qualifying percentile for the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test for Postgraduate courses (NEET-PG). The Court observed that such a move directly impacts the quality of medical education in the country and cannot be ignored merely because it is described as a policy decision.
The case was heard by a Bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe. During the hearing, the judges clearly indicated that the reduction in cut-off percentile appears to dilute academic standards in postgraduate medical education.
Also Read: Supreme Court Seeks Reply on Plea Against Two-Shift Format for NEET-PG 2025
The Bench remarked,
“It is affecting the quality of education. More than anything, it is about the quality. You (Central government) will have to satisfy us on the reduction of the cut-off so drastically, virtually bringing it to zero.”
The Court emphasized that maintaining high standards in medical education is crucial because it ultimately affects patient care and public health.
Although the Centre argued that the decision was a policy matter within the executive’s domain, the Court made it clear that it would still examine the legality and validity of the move. The judges stated, “We will examine the policy decision,” while issuing notice to the Union government on a batch of petitions challenging the reduction.
The petitions challenge a notice dated January 13 issued by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS). The notice stated that the qualifying percentile for NEET-PG was reduced as per directions from the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
As per the revised criteria, the cut-off score for the general category has been reduced to 103 from 276 earlier. For SC/ST/OBC candidates, the qualifying score has been brought down to minus 40 from 235. Petitioners have argued that such a drastic reduction allows candidates with very low scores to become eligible for admission to postgraduate medical courses.
According to the petitions, this move is arbitrary and unconstitutional, violating Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners claim that reducing the minimum qualifying standards at the postgraduate level destroys merit and creates a serious risk to patient safety and public health.
During the proceedings, the Court also reviewed an affidavit filed by the government defending its decision. The affidavit described the reduction as a “policy decision” taken due to a large number of vacant postgraduate medical seats across the country.
Appearing for the Centre, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati submitted that all candidates appearing in NEET-PG are already qualified medical graduates. Therefore, according to the government, lowering the cut-off does not mean that unqualified individuals will enter the system.
However, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the petitioners, strongly opposed the move. He argued that the government’s main intention appears to be filling vacant seats rather than protecting academic excellence.
He submitted,
“The judgment in Preeti Srivastava held that filling up seats is not the primary objective. Rather, the priority is to ensure that the best education is imparted to the most meritorious students,”
highlighting the importance of merit in higher medical education.
He also pointed out the huge difference in fees between government and private medical colleges.
“For government seats, the fees range between Rs 9,000 and Rs 27,000. In contrast, fees in private colleges range from Rs 1 crore to Rs 1.5 crore. This is a fact that the regulators should consider. Many students who have merit cannot just pay these fees. Paying Rs 1 crore is too much. It is like foreign education, you cannot pay that. They keep lowering the percentile so rich people can afford this,”
he submitted.
This argument raised concerns about whether lowering the cut-off may indirectly benefit students who can afford expensive private college fees, while genuinely meritorious but financially weaker students may lose out.
Also Read: NEET-PG 2024 || Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Reconduct Counselling
After hearing the submissions, the Supreme Court noted that the matter raises serious questions regarding standards in medical education and its long-term impact on healthcare in India. The Court has now issued notice to the Central government and will further examine whether the reduction in NEET-PG qualifying percentile is legally valid and constitutionally sound.
The case is expected to have major implications for postgraduate medical admissions, regulatory standards, and the balance between executive policy decisions and judicial review in matters affecting public health and education quality.
Case Title:
Harisharan Devgan v. Union of India
W.P.(C) No. 136/2026 and connected matters
Click Here to Read Our Reports on NEET-PG Cut-Off
