The public interest litigation filed in the Supreme Court last week, challenging the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences’ decision to drastically reduce the qualifying cut-off percentiles for NEET-PG 2025-26, is expected to be listed for hearing sometime next-week. The January 13 notice issued by the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC), which lowered the thresholds to what petitioners describe as “abnormally low levels,” including zero and even negative scores, had drawn backlash from doctors across the country, along with medical students.
Speaking to indianexpress.com, advocate Satyam Singh said, “We (petitioners) are expecting that the matter will be listed before the court sometime this week, by January 23. However, taking into account the procedural time lines, at the earliest we can expect it to be listed within next week, following the Republic Day holiday on January 26.”
Read| With cut-off lowered to ‘minus 40’ to fill 18,000 vacant seats, doctors warn of falling standards
The petition filed by social worker Harisharan Devgan also names neurosurgeon Dr Saurav Kumar, Dr Lakshya Mittal, President of the United Doctors Front, and Dr Akash Soni, a member of the World Medical Association. The plea was filed through advocate-on-record Neema Singh, with assistance from advocates Satyam Singh Rajput and Adarsh Singh.
The plea has been filed under Article 32, which allows direct access to the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights, and alleges that the cut-off reduction violates Article 14’s protection against arbitrariness and Article 21’s guarantee of life and health, in the larger sense.
According to the writ petition, accessed by indianexpress.com, the petitioners have said that the respondent’s decision prioritises filling vacant seats over maintaining merit and minimum standards of competence required in medical education.
It contends that postgraduate medical education cannot be treated as a commercial exercise and that regulatory authorities are required to prevent dilution of standards. The plea argues that “lowering eligibility criteria to such levels undermines the purpose of a competitive examination and has implications for patient safety and public health.”
Story continues below this ad
The petition also noted that the action undertaken by the counselling authority violates procedural fairness: “rules of the game cannot be changed mid-stream,” it said. The plea notes that eligibility criteria cannot be altered after commencement of the selection process, as aspirants prepared, competed, and made career choices based on the originally notified cut-offs.
Earlier in 2023, a similar situation had occurred when cut-offs for all categories were brought down to zero percentile, again corresponding to a lowest score of minus 40. That year, analysis of NEET PG results showed that candidates with zero marks, negative scores, and even the lowest score of minus 40 out of 800 were deemed qualified. In 2025, hundreds are likely to have scored zero or below, with the lowest score once again being minus 40.
What adds weight to the present challenge is the government’s own past position on maintaining minimum standards in medical education. In July 2022, while opposing a plea seeking a reduction in NEET PG cut-offs, the Centre had told the court that minimum qualifying percentiles were essential to ensure baseline educational standards and safeguard admissions to professional courses. Accepting this argument, the Delhi High Court had then dismissed the plea, observing that dilution of medical education standards “involves in its ambit the matter of life and death”.
The plea also challenges the proportionality of the measure. It states that even if filling vacant seats is a legitimate objective, reducing the qualifying percentile to zero or negative scores is excessive. The petition notes that alternative measures, such as improved counselling processes, redistribution of seats, or regulation of fees, could have been explored instead.
© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd
