SC Scrutinizes NEET-PG 2025 Percentile Reduction: Quality of Medical Education at Stake

Hindustan Times - India · 21 Feb 2026 · 2 min read
Prelims · Polity Mains · GS2 Polity and constitution High relevance

The Supreme Court has demanded the Centre justify its decision to drastically reduce NEET-PG 2025 qualifying percentiles, raising concerns about potential compromise in medical education quality amidst efforts to fill vacant postgraduate seats.

Key points

Supreme Court's Directive: A bench led by Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe questioned the Centre's rationale for reducing NEET-PG 2025 cut-offs to near-zero levels, emphasizing the need to maintain medical education standards.

Government's Defense: The Centre argued in its affidavit that NEET-PG serves only to rank candidates for limited seats, not to assess clinical competence, which is already certified by MBBS qualifications.

Vacancy Crisis: For 2025-26, 70,000 PG seats were available with 2,24,029 candidates appearing; 9,621 All-India Quota seats remained vacant after Round 2, including 5,213 in government colleges.

Expanded Eligibility: The percentile reduction made 1,00,054 additional candidates eligible for Round 3 counseling, totaling 2,28,170 candidates, to address seat wastage representing substantial public investment.

Quality Assurance Mechanisms: The affidavit highlighted that PG training involves supervised practice and requires 50% minimum marks in exit exams, maintaining certification standards.

Historical Precedent: The Centre noted percentile reductions have occurred since NEET-PG's 2017 inception, including a 2023 reduction to zero, to prevent seat wastage.

[GS2-Governance] This case tests the balance between administrative flexibility (MoHFW/NMC decisions) and judicial oversight of education policy under Article 21's right to health.

[GS3-Economy] The vacancy issue reflects systemic inefficiencies in medical education planning, with 70,000 PG seats failing to match candidate numbers or distribution needs.

Constitutional Challenge: Petitioners argue the cut-off reduction violates Article 21 by endangering public health through lowered standards, framing it as a fundamental rights issue.

Way Forward: India should establish a transparent seat allocation algorithm with dynamic cut-offs, implement regional quota reforms to address distribution imbalances, and create a national faculty development program to expand quality PG training capacity.

Key terms

National Medical Commission

Statutory body established in 2019 replacing MCI, regulating medical education under NMC Act 2019. It oversees curriculum standards, accreditation, and ethical practice, crucial for maintaining India's medical education quality amid expansion.

All-India Quota

15% UG and 50% PG seats in government colleges reserved for pan-India allocation through NEET. Represents a federal balance between state autonomy and national equity in medical education access.

Article 21 Challenge

Petitioners' argument that reduced standards violate the fundamental right to life/health. Reflects judicial activism's role in education policy, following precedents like Pramati Educational Trust (2014) on quality standards.

NEET-PG

National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test for Postgraduate courses, conducted since 2017 by NBEMS to allocate MD/MS seats. Its constitutional significance lies in balancing Articles 19(1)(g) (right to practice profession) and 21 (right to health) through standardized medical admissions.