FORDA Condemns NEET PG 2025 as Institutional Collapse, Not Just Exam Failure
The Federation of Resident Doctors’ Association India (FORDA) issued a strong statement today. They questioned whether the NEET PG 2025 exam represents a simple failure or a deeper institutional breakdown. FORDA represents resident doctors across government hospitals nationwide.
"NEET PG 2025 will be remembered as the year an institution betrayed its mandate," the association declared. They listed multiple grievances including opacity, denial of answer keys, arbitrary disqualifications, centre misallocation, delayed counselling, and the controversial zero and negative qualifying cut-offs.
Zero and Negative Cutoffs Spark Outrage
The immediate trigger for this escalation came from the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS). They sharply lowered Round 3 qualifying percentiles for NEET PG 2025. The General and Economically Weaker Sections cutoff dropped to the 7th percentile. This equals a score of just 103 out of 800.
For Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, and Other Backward Classes categories, the qualifying percentile was reduced to zero. This translated to a revised cutoff score of minus 40.
FORDA described the outcome in blunt terms. "This isn’t admission; it’s a lottery," their statement asserted. They argued that eligibility had been completely decoupled from academic performance and merit.
A Crisis Built Over Months, Not Days
FORDA traces this crisis back to March 2025. NBEMS announced a two-shift examination format for NEET PG, citing logistical constraints. The association claims the rationale was never fully explained to candidates.
"Two shifts in a single day create vastly different question difficulty levels," FORDA's press release noted. The normalisation formula meant to equalise outcomes across shifts was not disclosed to the public.
Medical aspirants were not asking for special favours, FORDA emphasized. They were demanding basic fairness and transparency. "NBEMS refused both," the association stated.
Legal Challenges and Further Delays
Petitions followed in the Supreme Court in May 2025. They questioned the two-shift format and the lack of transparency in the normalisation process. On May 29 and 30, the Court delivered a significant ruling.
The Court held that two-shift examinations were "arbitrary" and "unreliable" for high-stakes postgraduate medical admissions. Applying undisclosed normalisation methods across shifts posed unacceptable risks to merit-based selection.
This ruling forced NBEMS to postpone the examination from June 15 to August 3, 2025. They needed to accommodate single-shift logistics across nearly 900 centres nationwide. FORDA described this delay as compounding uncertainty, career stagnation, and severe financial strain for thousands of candidates.
Post-Exam Chaos and Mismanagement
After the NEET PG exam on August 3, aspirants waited for provisional answer keys that never materialised. NBEMS provided no window for candidates to challenge questionable responses.
FORDA suggested some of the 22 candidates later disqualified for malpractice "may have been trapped by flawed keys that were never disclosed."
Centre allocation created another major problem. Candidates from northern states received centre allotments in Chennai. Southern candidates were sent to Delhi. FORDA estimates this imposed travel costs between Rs 75,000 and Rs 1,00,000 on top of the Rs 4,250 examination fee.
The press release documented the cumulative toll. "Three months of uncertainty, anxiety, and lost wages," it stated. Women candidates faced safety concerns. Economically weaker candidates struggled with accommodation and travel expenses.
Results were declared on August 19, weeks after the examination. Confusion followed immediately. Twenty-two disqualifications were announced with no clear appeal mechanism. "No transparency," the association said. "Families celebrated. Then heartbreak."
Counselling Paralysis Impacts Hospitals and Patients
By September 2025, the problem extended beyond aspirants. Counselling that should have concluded within weeks dragged on for over 110 days. Hospitals began reporting critical staff shortages. Patient care suffered diagnostic delays.
"Medical seats remained vacant. Hospitals struggled with staff shortages. Patients faced diagnostic delays," the FORDA statement highlighted.
Aspirants could not plan relocations. Hospitals could not finalise rosters. Postgraduate training did not begin on schedule. The entire medical education system stalled without proper explanation.
NBEMS later justified the drastic cut-off reduction by citing vacant seats. Sources quoted by ANI on January 14 indicated over 18,000 PG seats remained unfilled after Round 2 counselling across government and private medical colleges.
"These seats are vital for expanding India’s pool of trained medical specialists," sources told ANI. Leaving them vacant, they argued, directly undermined healthcare delivery nationwide.
FORDA completely rejects this justification. "Filling vacancies is not the same as surrendering standards," the association countered. They argue that systemic delays, gross mismanagement, and opaque processes created the vacancies in the first place.
Merit Diluted and Public Trust Eroded
In a letter to Union Health Minister Jagat Prakash Nadda, FORDA urged the Centre to withdraw the decision to reduce cut-off scores.
"This unprecedented move undermines the sanctity of a merit-based selection process," the letter stated. "It devalues the rigorous preparation of lakhs of aspiring doctors and poses a grave threat to the credibility of the medical profession in the eyes of the common public."
The association warned that lowering cut-offs without explanation or consultation "demoralises toppers" and risks patient care outcomes. They also alleged the move disproportionately benefits private medical colleges.
"This slash favours private medical colleges by filling seats with lower-scoring candidates at exorbitant fees," the letter claimed. "It prioritises institutional profits over student welfare."
The Federation of All India Medical Association echoed this concern. They warned that allowing candidates with negative scores to qualify would "erode public trust" and potentially trigger nationwide protests if the notification was not withdrawn.
Calls for Systemic Reform and Transparency
All NEET PG candidates are already qualified doctors. They have completed their MBBS degrees and mandatory internships. This dispute is not about entry-level competence. It questions whether postgraduate specialisation remains governed by transparent, predictable standards.
FORDA has called for a high-level committee to review the situation. This committee should comprise the National Medical Commission (NMC), the NBEMS, and resident doctor representatives. Its mandate would be to review cut-off policies and overall examination governance.
What remains unresolved is critical. Will the response to vacant seats address the root causes that created them? Or will the system simply redefine eligibility until the numbers fit? The question NEET PG now faces extends beyond admissions. It asks whether confidence in the system can ever be restored once merit becomes negotiable.
