NEET PG Cut-Off Plummets to Minus 40, Doctors Sound Alarm on Merit Erosion
The Medical Counselling Committee has made a controversial decision. It slashed the NEET PG 2025 qualifying cut-off to zero percentile. For certain categories, this means a score of minus 40. The move aims to fill nearly 18,000 vacant postgraduate medical seats. However, doctors' associations across India are raising strong objections.
Government Cites Resource Utilization as Rationale
The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare directed this action. Officials want to prevent seats from going unfilled in the 2025–26 academic session. The National Medical Commission explained the reasoning. It stated that the current qualifying percentile criteria limit the pool of eligible candidates. This happens despite many vacant seats.
"Leaving such a large number of seats vacant defeats the objective," the NMC said. "It results in wastage of valuable national medical education resources." The commission emphasized that non-filling of seats is not due to lack of eligibility. Instead, it blames the restrictive percentile criteria.
Revised Cut-Off Percentiles Spark Concern
The new eligibility norms apply to round 3 of NEET PG 2025 counselling. They will affect all subsequent rounds too. Here are the specific changes:
- SC, ST, and OBC candidates: Qualifying percentile reduced to '0', corresponding to a cut-off score of '–40' out of 800.
- Unreserved category candidates: Qualifying percentile lowered from 50th to 7th percentile, with revised cut-off score of 103.
- Unreserved candidates with benchmark disabilities: Qualifying percentile reduced to 5, with cut-off score of 90.
The NEET PG examination follows negative marking. One mark gets deducted for every incorrect response. This makes negative overall scores possible. Now such candidates become eligible for counselling.
Medical Bodies Voice Strong Opposition
Dr Rohan Krishnan, President of FAIMA, criticized the decision sharply. He called it a reflection of deeper structural issues. "This shows poor seat planning in postgraduate medical education," he stated. "It is not a genuine attempt to address specialty-wise shortages."
Dr Krishnan acknowledged that certain non-clinical subjects attract fewer candidates. However, he argued that extreme cut-off reduction does not resolve this imbalance. "A marginal relaxation of 5–10 percent could have helped," he said. "A minus 40 cut-off sends a very different signal."
Vacancy Numbers Highlight the Problem
MCC data reveals the scale of vacant seats. Of 32,215 seats available in round 2, a staggering 17,623 were clear vacancies. These seats were either never allotted or left unjoined. Another 11,837 seats became virtual vacancies due to seat upgrades. Authorities added 135 new seats.
Dr Krishnan pointed to private medical colleges as primary beneficiaries. "Private colleges charge up to Rs 2 crore per seat," he revealed. "Nearly 200 seats remain vacant there. This represents potential turnover of Rs 400–500 crore." He argued that such reductions historically ensure these seats do not stay unfilled.
Students Express Mixed Reactions
A third-year medical student from a West Bengal government college shared thoughts. "Expanding PG seats helps ease excessive competition," the student said. "It could strengthen healthcare staffing over time."
However, the student emphasized the importance of how seats get filled. "Lowering cut-offs to zero or negative percentiles does not maintain fair competition," they added. "If someone secures a top college after hard work, that achievement should not get diluted."
Seat Expansion Continues Amid Vacancies
The Ministry of Health provided broader context during Parliament's Winter Session. India has 80,291 postgraduate medical seats for 2025–26. Government medical colleges hold 37,282 seats. Private institutions have 25,302 seats. Additional programs offer 17,707 seats.
Despite existing vacancies, the NMC approved 171 more PG seats recently. These cover key specialties like general medicine, surgery, and paediatrics.
Doctors Suggest Alternative Approaches
Dr Dhruv Chauhan of the IMA Junior Doctors' Network questioned the repeated cut-off reductions. "This appears aimed at protecting private college commercial viability," he said. "It does not strengthen public healthcare or address specialty shortages."
Dr Krishnan warned about international implications. "Medicine is a global profession," he noted. "Indian doctors work worldwide. Such drastic cut-off reductions undermine our medical education credibility. They become deeply embarrassing internationally."
Both doctors called for different solutions. They suggested addressing specialty preference imbalances instead of repeatedly lowering standards. The controversy highlights ongoing tensions between seat utilization and merit preservation in India's medical education system.
