New Delhi: Defending its controversial decision to sharply lower the NEET-PG qualifying cut-off, the Centre Tuesday told the Supreme Court that the move was based on “detailed deliberation” of exam data and did not dilute merit, as admissions continue to be strictly rank-based.
In a fresh affidavit, the government said that the decision was finalised at a 30 December 2025 meeting to review eligibility criteria for the NEET-PG 2025-26, based on data shared by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS)—the government body that organises pan-India medical entrance exams. It maintained that the “sanctity of merit” has been preserved throughout the All India Quota (AIQ) counselling process.
The affidavit—filed by Dr. P.K. Dass, Assistant Director General (Medical Education) in the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare—is the government’s third submission to the SC in response to a writ petition filed by social worker Harisharan Devgan and others challenging the January cut-off revision.
On 13 January, the NBEMS reduced the general category qualifying percentile from the 50th to the 7th percentile, reserved categories from the 40th percentile to zero, and persons with disabilities in the general category from the 45th to the 5th percentile. In effect, candidates with negative scores became eligible under reserved categories, while a score of 103 out of 800 sufficed for the general category.
The revision made 95,924 additional candidates eligible, expanding the total counselling pool from 1,28,116 to over 2,24,000. Reports that candidates scoring as low as 4 out of 800 had secured MS Orthopaedics seats at government medical colleges drew widespread criticism, prompting the Supreme Court to demand a detailed explanation from the Centre.
In its first affidavit filed 16 February, the NBEMS submitted that the reduction was necessary to prevent large-scale vacancy of postgraduate seats. The Board said the cut-off reduction made an additional 95,913 candidates eligible for the NEET-PG 2025 counselling, increasing the pool from 1,28,116 to 2,24,029.
The Centre’s second affidavit, filed through the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS), took a broader legal position—calling the cut-off decision a “policy matter” outside judicial purview. It argued that NEET-PG is a ranking examination to allocate limited seats, not a test of minimum medical competence, which is already established through the MBBS qualification.
Also Read: Why NEET-PG’s percentile cut-off was lowered to 0, and why doctors are angry
The latest affidavit
The fresh affidavit told the court that the percentile reduction was applied uniformly across all categories and “did not, in any manner, disturb or alter the inter se merit position of the candidates as determined by their performance in the examination.”
“The relative ranking of candidates, as reflected in the AIQ rank list, continues to be the foundation upon which all allotments are made,” it stated, adding that all candidates— whether originally eligible or newly eligible—were considered strictly by rank.
To substantiate this, the government shared the NBEMS data for the 30 December 2025 meeting that shows the estimated number of candidates that would become eligible under various percentile scenarios, broken down by category.
It shows that at the current cut-off, 1,28,116 candidates were eligible before the reduction—a figure that would rise to over 2,24,000 at zero percentile for reserved categories. The annexure also details the score equivalents corresponding to each percentile threshold across General, OBC, SC, and ST categories, as well as for PwD candidates.
“The lowering of the percentile merely expanded the pool of eligible candidates without granting any undue advantage or preference to any individual,” the affidavit said. “The entire allotment process has been conducted through a transparent, automated, and rule-based online counselling system.”
Vacant seats
The affidavit states that after Round 2 of NEET-PG 2025 counselling, 9,621 seats remained vacant under the All India Quota across specialties. Of these, 5,213 seats were unfilled in government medical colleges, including AIQ and Diplomate of National Board or DNB seats.
The Centre argued that this shows the cut-off reduction was not intended to benefit private institutions, but to prevent large-scale vacancy of seats, including those in publicly funded government colleges, ensuring optimal utilisation of medical education infrastructure.
The affidavit also annexes minutes of a 30 December meeting convened by the DGHS with officials from the Health Ministry and the National Medical Commission to review the NEET-PG eligibility criteria. The meeting was held after Round 2 counselling showed significant vacancies, with projections of up to 20,000 unfilled seats nationwide.
The percentile cut-off, it contended, was primarily a screening tool and could be rationalised to improve seat utilisation. The panel then decided to sharply lower cut-offs across categories.
The petitioners, represented by advocate Satyam Singh Rajput, have argued that collapsing the eligibility threshold to zero—regardless of how seats are eventually allotted—is itself a dilution of standards.
“The government’s stand is deeply flawed, as it appears singularly focused on filling vacant seats while conveniently invoking concerns of compromising the quality and standards of medical education,” Singh told ThePrint.
“This argument is not only contradictory but also an attempt to deflect from the real issue. Such a stance reflects arbitrariness and undermines fairness, transparency, and the legitimate expectations of medical aspirants.”
The Supreme Court has questioned the rationale for the sharp reduction and asked the Centre to explain how it aligns with maintaining standards in medical education, he said.
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: SC ends domicile quota in PG medical admissions. What ruling says & why southern states are unhappy