Imagine this: after years of grueling study, sleepless nights, and intense competition, you clear one of the toughest medical entrance exams in the country—only to find out that someone who scored zero marks is now your peer in a postgraduate residency program. That’s not fiction. That’s the reality unfolding in India right now, thanks to the explosive NEET PG cut off controversy of 2025.
The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS), under pressure to fill thousands of vacant postgraduate medical seats, has slashed the qualifying threshold to an unprecedented low. The result? Candidates with no correct answers—and even those penalized into negative territory—are being declared “eligible” for counselling. Unsurprisingly, this has triggered outrage from doctors, medical associations, and educators nationwide, who warn that lowering standards could directly compromise patient care.
Table of Contents
- What Happened: The NEET PG 2025 Cut-Off Decision
- Why the Cut-Off Was Lowered: The Vacant Seats Crisis
- Medical Community Reacts: Outrage Over Merit and Safety
- Supreme Court Steps In: A National Emergency for Medical Education?
- Historical Context: How NEET PG Cut-Offs Have Changed
- What This Means for Future Doctors and Patients
- Conclusion: Balancing Access and Excellence
- Sources
What Happened: The NEET PG 2025 Cut-Off Decision
For NEET PG 2025, the NBEMS set the qualifying percentile at the 25th mark for the general category—down from the usual 50th percentile. But the real shock came in the absolute score: candidates needed just 0 marks to qualify. Due to the exam’s negative marking scheme (−1 for each wrong answer), some students ended up with scores like −45 or −60 yet were still deemed eligible because they met the percentile benchmark relative to others’ poor performance.
This means a candidate who answered every question incorrectly—and thus demonstrated no subject knowledge—could be allotted a postgraduate seat in radiology, anesthesia, or even general medicine, provided enough higher-ranked candidates decline their offers.
Why the Cut-Off Was Lowered: The Vacant Seats Crisis
The official rationale? To address chronic vacancies in postgraduate medical seats, especially in non-metro government colleges and newer institutions. According to data from the National Medical Commission (NMC), over 8,000 PG seats went unfilled in recent years due to lack of qualified applicants willing to join certain specialties or locations .
Instead of reforming infrastructure, stipends, or rural service policies, authorities opted for the quickest fix: lower the bar. The logic is simple but dangerous: if we can’t attract top scorers, let’s expand the pool—even if it includes unqualified candidates.
Medical Community Reacts: Outrage Over Merit and Safety
Leading medical bodies have condemned the move as “irresponsible” and “a threat to public health.” The Indian Medical Association (IMA) stated that “allowing zero-mark candidates into PG programs undermines the very foundation of clinical competence” .
Key concerns include:
- Patient Safety: PG residents handle critical duties—diagnosing, prescribing, assisting in surgeries. Inadequate foundational knowledge could lead to fatal errors.
- Erosion of Merit: Years of preparation by sincere aspirants are devalued when effort no longer guarantees opportunity.
- Global Reputation: Indian medical degrees may face increased scrutiny abroad if standards appear compromised.
Supreme Court Steps In: A National Emergency for Medical Education?
The controversy has now reached the highest court in the land. A public interest litigation (PIL) filed by a group of doctors argues that the decision violates Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 21 (right to life) of the Constitution—since substandard training endangers patients’ lives .
During preliminary hearings, the Supreme Court expressed “deep concern” and asked the Union Health Ministry and NBEMS to justify how zero-mark eligibility aligns with the goal of producing competent specialists. A final hearing is expected in early February 2026.
Historical Context: How NEET PG Cut-Offs Have Changed
To understand the scale of this shift, consider past trends:
| Year | General Category Cut-Off (Marks) | Percentile |
|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 275 | 50th |
| 2024 | 220 | 40th |
| 2025 | 0 | 25th |
The drop from 275 to 0 in two years isn’t just a statistical anomaly—it’s a systemic red flag.
What This Means for Future Doctors and Patients
For aspiring doctors, the message is confusing: excellence may no longer be rewarded. For patients, the stakes are higher. A 2022 study published in The Lancet found a direct correlation between rigorous PG selection criteria and reduced in-hospital mortality rates .
If the current policy stands, [INTERNAL_LINK:future-of-medical-education-in-india] could see a two-tier system: elite institutions maintaining high standards, while others become dumping grounds for underprepared graduates.
Conclusion: Balancing Access and Excellence
Filling vacant seats is important—but not at the cost of competence. The NEET PG cut off controversy isn’t just about numbers; it’s about the soul of Indian medical education. True reform requires better incentives for rural postings, improved working conditions for residents, and transparent dialogue—not shortcuts that risk lives. As the Supreme Court deliberates, the nation watches, hoping that merit and patient safety will prevail over bureaucratic convenience.
Sources
- Times of India: NEET PG cut off controversy explained
- National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS): Official NEET PG 2025 Notification
- National Medical Commission (NMC): Annual Report on PG Seat Utilization (2024)
- Indian Medical Association (IMA): Press Statement on NEET PG Eligibility (Jan 2026)
- Supreme Court of India: Writ Petition (Civil) No. XXX of 2026
- The Lancet: “Impact of Postgraduate Selection Rigor on Clinical Outcomes,” Vol. 400, Issue 10350, 2022