The Supreme Court of India has asked the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) to explain and justify its decision to significantly reduce the qualifying cut-off percentiles for the NEET PG 2025 examination. The top court’s directive came while hearing a petition challenging the board’s January 13, 2026 notification that revised eligibility criteria for counselling in the 2025-26 session.
Supreme Court Hearing on NEET PG Cut-Off Reduction
During the hearing before a bench led by Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe, the court noted that the matter involved “competing considerations” and emphasised the need to balance academic standards with seat utilisation. The bench expressed concern about the drastic reduction in qualifying thresholds and questioned whether lowering them to extremely low levels was justifiable. The Supreme Court has directed NBEMS and the Union government to file detailed affidavits explaining the rationale behind the cut-off changes. The matter has been listed for further hearing after the filings are submitted.
Revised NEET PG Qualifying Percentiles
NBEMS notified revised qualifying cut-off percentiles for the third round of NEET PG 2025 counselling in January 2026. The changes substantially lowered eligibility thresholds across categories:
- General/EWS: Reduced from 50th percentile (about 276/800 marks) to 7th percentile (around 103 marks)
- General PwBD: Reduced from 45th percentile (about 255 marks) to 5th percentile (about 90 marks)
- SC/ST/OBC (including PwBD): Reduced from 40th percentile (about 235 marks) to 0th percentile (as low as minus 40 marks)
Critics and petitioners argue that such severe reduction undermines merit and academic standards in postgraduate medical education, potentially affecting patient safety and quality of healthcare training. The petition referenced constitutional provisions, alleging the cut-off change violated Articles 14 and 21.
NEET PG Legal and Sector Concerns
The challenge was filed by petitioners, including doctors and social activists who contend that reducing qualifying criteria to extremely low or negative marks effectively devalues the NEET PG standard of assessment, going against statutory intent and the National Medical Commission Act, 2019. They argue that strict eligibility norms are essential to maintain competency in medical postgraduate training. In its observations, the Supreme Court made it clear that it will examine whether the NBEMS decision was “drastically wrong” or arbitrary while ensuring that any reduction does not compromise public health and educational quality.