NEET PG Cut-off Row: DGHS has formed panel for internal audit of admission system, Centre tells SC

New Delhi: The Centre on Tuesday informed the Supreme Court (SC) that it has set up a high-powered committee under the chairmanship of the Director General of Health Services (DGHS) to devise a mechanism for carrying out a comprehensive audit of the existing National Eligibility cum Entrance Test Postgraduate (NEET-PG) admission system. A bench comprising Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the reduction in the qualifying percentile for NEET-PG 2025 when Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati told the court that the 12-member panel was constituted through a notification dated July 23, in compliance with the court's oral directions, with the DGHS serving as its chairperson.

She submitted that the term of reference of the committee will be to formulate the mechanism for internal audit of the existing system of admissions through NEET, to identify the lacunae in the existing system, and to find implementable and practical solutions for the same. The bench recorded the submission of Bhati and gave eight weeks to the panel to file its report. "We will actively discuss the issue once the report comes in," the bench said. It said the panel may co-opt members from National Commission for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM) and National Commission for Homeopathy (NCH).

Expert panel composition detailed

As per the office orfer dated July 23, 2026, issued by the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS), Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, the expert committee has been constituted under the chairmanship of the Directorate General of Health Services in compliance with the Supreme COurt's directions.

The 12 members committee includes Loveneesh G. Krishna, DGHS, as chairman; Sunita Mondal, Adviser, ME Cell and Additional DGHS; Nita Khurana, Additional DG (MWB), Directorate General of Health Services; G. Kausalya, DDG (LME); B. Srinivas, DDG (BS); Vinay Gupta, Additional Director, NBE; representatives of the National Medical Commission (NMC) and the National Testing Agency (NTA); Kumar Rahul, Director, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; Praveen Kumar Dass, ADG (ME), as Member Secretary; Sachin Prabhakar, Senior Scientist, NIC; and Manvendra Pratap, Deputy Director (ME Cell).

Also read FMGE 2026: Protest at Jantar Mantar on Monday; examinees demand exam review, facilities on par with NEET

The committee has been asked to develop an admission system audit mechanism to be conducted in a comprehensive manner involving various stakeholders to identify lacunae and gaps in the existing admission system and suggest feasible and effective solutions, the order from the office says. It also states that the order has been issued with the approval of the competent authority.

Court examining percentile cut-off challenge

Earlier, the top court said it would examine whether the sharp reduction in the qualifying marks for NEET-PG 2025-26 affects the standard of postgraduate medical education. The top court had said that although the Union was justified in stating that NEET-PG was not an entry into MBBS and that candidates are already doctors, the court would still like to consider the effect of reducing the cut-off. Pleas have been filed in the apex court by social worker Harisharan Devgan, Dr Saurav Kumar, Dr Lakshya Mittal and Dr Akash Soni claiming that the cut-off reduction violates Articles 14 and 21.

Senior advocate Pinky Anand and advocate Satyam Singh Rajput represented petitioner Harisharan Devgan before the Supreme Court. The petition challenges the January 13 notification issued by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS), which lowered the minimum qualifying percentile for the third round of NEET-PG 2025-26 counselling. In its affidavit, the Director General of Health Services under the Union health ministry submitted that the petition concerns an academic and policy decision taken by the competent statutory authorities under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019, in the public interest and within the scope of expert regulation.

Centre defends percentile reduction

"It is respectfully submitted that the reduction of qualifying percentile for NEET-PG is not unprecedented. Since the inception of NEET-PG in 2017 percentile reductions have been affected in appropriate circumstances to prevent seat wastage. In the academic year 2023 as well, the qualifying percentile was reduced to zero across categories. The present decision is thus consistent with the established policy and administrative practice," it had said.

Also read NEET Counselling 2026: In NMC’s new rules for PwBD admissions, individualised reports, chance to appeal

The Centre said scores in NEET-PG examination are a function of relative performance and examination design, which cannot be construed as determinative of clinical incompetence. "It is pertinent to note that purpose of the NEET-PG is not to certify minimum competence which stands established by the MBBS qualification itself of the candidates but to generate an inter se merit list for allocation of limited postgraduate seats," it said.

Government cites vacant seat data

The Centre informed the court that only candidates holding a recognised MBBS degree and having completed the compulsory rotating internship are eligible to appear for NEET-PG. It said that for the 2025-26 academic session, around 70,000 postgraduate seats were available against 2,24,029 candidates, including 31,742 seats under the All India Quota (AIQ) across various specialities. According to the government, 9,621 AIQ seats remained vacant after the second round of NEET-PG counselling.

"Out of these, 5,213 seats were vacant in government medical colleges alone (including AIQ and DNB seats). This factual position conclusively demonstrates that the reduction of percentile was not undertaken to benefit private medical institutions, but to prevent large-scale vacancy of seats, including in government institutions created through public expenditure," it said.

The Centre argued that judicial intervention in academic and policy matters is generally limited, as such decisions are taken by expert bodies. It submitted that courts ordinarily do not interfere unless a decision is found to be manifestly arbitrary, mala fide, or in violation of statutory or constitutional provisions.

Also read SC raps NCAHP, states for not framing regulations, setting up councils for allied health sciences

Earlier, the NBEMS told the top court that 95,913 additional candidates had become eligible for NEET-PG 2025 counselling after the qualifying cut-off percentile was reduced. According to the notice published by the NBEMS, the NEET-PG cut-off for the general category has been reduced to the seventh percentile from 50.

(with PTI inputs)