NEET PG Admission Reform: Centre proposes rank-based merit system after cut-off controversy

The National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test for Postgraduates (NEET PG) and National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test for Super Speciality (NEET SS) may move from the existing percentile-based qualifying system to a rank-based merit system, the Centre has informed the Supreme Court. A 12-member expert committee constituted to review the postgraduate medical admission system has recommended the change, stating that the National Medical Commission (NMC) has granted in-principle approval to the proposal.

According to a report by Bar and Bench, the committee submitted its findings in a report filed before the SC and said that a draft regulation on the proposed change is expected to be issued shortly for stakeholder consultation. Besides the proposed shift to a rank-based system, the committee recommended several measures to address the recurring issue of vacant postgraduate medical seats. These include reducing fees for non-clinical courses and exempting candidates opting for pre-clinical and para-clinical seats from service bonds.

The report was submitted following the apex court's directions to the Union government to conduct a comprehensive audit of the existing NEET admission system, identify gaps and recommend practical solutions.

Why did SC seek a review of NEET PG admission system?

The matter came up after the Union Health Ministry drastically reduced the qualifying cut-off percentiles for NEET PG 2025. Under the revised criteria, the qualifying score for the general category was reduced from 276 to 103, while the cut-off for SC, ST and OBC categories was lowered from 235 to minus 40.

Also read NEET PG Counselling: At private medical colleges, deemed-university tag brings up to 1,471% fee hike

A Bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe had questioned the significant reduction in qualifying percentiles, observing that it appeared to affect the quality of medical education. The court would examine the government's decision despite it being a policy matter.

In its affidavit, the Centre said the expert committee had observed that although competent authorities reduced qualifying percentiles depending on the number of vacant seats, minimum standards of postgraduate medical education must be maintained. The committee also emphasised that the importance of competitive examinations should not be reduced to an administrative formality.

NEET PG admission: Expert committee suggests measures to fill vacant medical seats

To address vacancies in postgraduate medical courses, the 12-member committee proposed several measures:

Lower fees for non-clinical courses: State fee fixation committees and other competent authorities should consider separate fee structures for clinical and non-clinical branches, with lower fees for non-clinical courses to encourage candidates to opt for these seats.

Exemption from service bonds: Candidates taking admission to pre-clinical and para-clinical subjects should be exempted from service bond requirements to prevent vacancies in these courses.

Also read In a first for NEET UG Counselling, costliest medical colleges slash MBBS fees up to 40% as seats go vacant

Additional counselling rounds: The committee noted that additional counselling rounds were being conducted following court directions to prevent seats from going vacant. However, it also highlighted that these rounds also increase the overall duration of counselling process.

Preventing seat blocking: The examination-conducting bodies, including NTA and NBEMS should explore Know Your Customer (KYC) and biometric verification mechanisms to prevent candidates from appearing in entrance examinations merely to block seats.

Vacant dental and nursing seats: The committee recommended considering the discontinuation of seats that remain vacant for two to three consecutive years and reviewing fees for courses.

NEET PG Counselling: Committee recommends changes to reduce delays

The report also examined delays in medical counselling, which have repeatedly affected the commencement of academic sessions. MCC informed expert panel that several changes had been introduced in 2026–27 counselling process to reduce delays and inconvenience for candidates.

Under the revised system, candidates are categorised as 'Freeze' and 'Float' depending on whether they wish to retain their allotted seats or seek an upgrade. Candidates opting for the float option can accept their allotted seats online and apply for upgradation without physically visiting the institution.

Also read MUHS Nashik plans 865 new colleges: 51 for MBBS, most in small towns; big push for allied health sciences

The process of relieving candidates from previously allotted seats after an upgrade has also been shifted online. Candidates are required to pay fees only once, at the institution where they ultimately choose to take admission. Online document uploads and verification by institute nodal officers have also been introduced.

NEET Counselling: Expert committee suggests further reforms

For future counselling cycles, the committee has recommended that:

• NMC, NBEMS and NTA should provide verified seat details well before the commencement of counselling.
• MCC should prepare a fixed counselling schedule for every academic year and course and submit it to the Supreme Court for ratification.
• Standard operating procedures (SOPs) should be prepared and updated annually to streamline counselling.
• Regular meetings with stakeholders should be conducted before and after counselling to identify gaps and address recurring issues.
• An online mechanism should be developed to share NEET results directly with state counselling authorities.

SC hearing on NEET PG admission system

During the hearing, advocate Satyam Singh Rajput, appearing for one of the petitioners, argued that instead of justifying the drastic reduction in qualifying cut-off marks, the committee had proposed changing the marking system itself. Questioning the proposed shift, Rajput said, "Now, ironically, they changing from percentile to rank based. What is the difference?" The Supreme Court granted the petitioners time to file their responses to the expert committee's report and adjourned the matter, Live and Law reports.