NEET PG 2025: SC directs NBE to publish raw scores, answer key; Aadhaar tracking, penalties for seat blocking

In a good news for NEET PG aspirants, the Supreme Court has proposed at least 10 changes in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test -postgraduate (NEET PG 2025) counselling. These include publishing of NEET PG raw scores, answer key, and detailed normalisation method for ensuring transparency in the two-shift exam. It has also issued directions to enforce stricter action for seat blocking.

A bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan today was considering the issue of large-scale blocking of seats during NEET PG counselling and admission process. The court has issued directions in an effort to tackle the malpractices of seat-blocking for admissions to post-graduate medical courses, the Live Law reported.

The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) announced last year that the NEET PG exam will be conducted in two-shifts, adopting a normalisation method used by AIIMS New Delhi for its entrance exams.

However, the NBEMS did not publish NEET PG answer key or raw marks, citing concerns of possible misuse of the exam content. This decision was widely criticised by aspirants as they could not verify the fairness of the normalisation method. Additionally, errors in the state merit list issued by the NBE further delayed the NEET PG counselling process by several months.

Also read NEET PG Admissions: MBBS graduates in Maharashtra may get relief from revised one-year bond service

Supreme Court's decision on NEET PG 2025

The top court has issued the following directions, as per the report.

• Set up a nationally synchronized counselling schedule to coordinate All India Quota (AIQ) and state counselling rounds, helping to prevent seat blocking across different systems.
• Ensure transparency by publishing the NEET PG answer key, raw scores, and the detailed normalization method used for preparing rank list and state merit list.
• Mandate all private and deemed universities to disclose fees, including tuition, hostel, caution deposit, and other miscellaneous charges before the counselling begins.
• Set up a centralized fee regulation system under the supervision of the National Medical Commission (NMC).
• Allow admitted candidates to upgrade their seats after NEET PG round 2 without reopening counselling to new applicants.
• Enforce strict penalties for seat blocking, such as forfeiture of the security deposit, disqualification from future NEET PG exams for repeat offenders, and blacklisting of involved colleges.
• Introduce Aadhaar-based tracking of seats to eliminate multiple seat holdings and false representations.
• Hold state authorities and institutional DMEs accountable through contempt proceedings or disciplinary measures for violations of rules or schedules.
• Implement a standardized counselling code of conduct across all states, covering eligibility criteria, mop-up rounds, seat withdrawals, and grievance redressal timelines.
• Establish an independent oversight mechanism under NMC to conduct annual audits of counselling processes, ensuring fairness in admissions.

What is seat blocking in NEET PG counselling?

“Seat blocking in NEET-PG counselling occurs when candidates temporarily accept seats, only to abandon them later after securing more preferred options. This leads to those seats remaining unavailable in earlier rounds and opening up only in later stages, disadvantageing higher-ranked aspirants, who may have already committed to less preferred choices. Delays in state counselling, last-minute seat additions or deletions, and lack of coordination between quotas worsen the issue. As a result, lower-ranked candidates can secure better seats by taking risks, while merit-based selection is undermined," Justice JB Pardiwala said, as per the Live Law report.

"At the outset, it is to be noted that the NEET-PG counselling process was conceived as a transparent, merit-based national mechanism for allocating postgraduate medical seats. “Achieving a truly fair and efficient system will require more than policy tweaks; it demands structural coordination, technological modernization, and robust regulatory accountability at both State and Central levels,” the top court said.