NEET SS cut-off percentile should be reduced for govt doctors as they serve while studying: Supreme Court
Supreme Court of India
New Delhi: While issuing notice on a plea seeking to restrain the Tamil Nadu Government from surrendering 152 vacant in-service Super Speciality medical seats (2025-2026) under the in-service quota to All India Quota, the Supreme Court orally observed that the cut-off for in-service candidates serving under the State should be lower as they are serving the public and continuing their study at the same time.
The fresh plea has been filed by the Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association (and another). Issuing notice, a partial Court working days bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Joymalya Bagchi sought a response from the authorities on the matter.
During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna remarked that "a govt doctor, if acquires more skills, will serve public health better than private doctor".
"How many can afford private hospital?" questioned Justice Nagarathna.
Background:
Medical Dialogues had earlier reported on the Supreme Court case titled Tamilvani & Ors. vs State of Tamil Nadu, which concerns the reversion of 152 vacant in-service seats from Tamil Nadu to the All India Quota pool, prompting authorities to delay the counselling schedule. As a result, the counselling process for superspeciality medical admissions came to a standstill.
Recently, disposing of the plea seeking surrender of those unfilled DM and M.Ch seats from Tamil Nadu State Quota to All India Quota in the ongoing NEET-SS 2025 counselling process, the Supreme Court directed the State of Tamil Nadu Government to surrender these seats to the All India Quota.
"The State of Tamil Nadu will take necessary steps to intimate the Director General of Health Services about the 151 vacant seats that have remained unfilled," the Apex Court bench comprising Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe ordered so that these seats could be filled through the All India merit list.
Consequently, the new petition was filed by the Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association (and another) seeking to restrain the State from surrendering 152 vacant super speciality seats to All India Quota. The petitioners prayed that the in-service candidates in Tamil Nadu be permitted to compete for the said 152 seats in the 3rd round or a mop-up round if the percentile is reduced below 50% aafter the 2nd round of the all-India counselling.
As per the latest media report by Live Law, during the hearing of the matter on Wednesday, Senior Advocate P Wilson, the counsel for the petitioners, informed the Apex court that while the percentile was reduced for Post-Graduate seats, the 2nd round of counselling for super-speciality seats was not done in view of the order passed in Tamilveni's case, in which the Association of in-service officers was not a party.
He also argued that permitting the 152 NEET SS seats to be filled through the All India Quota before the completion of the 2nd round of counselling and before taking a final decision regarding the reduction of qualifying percentile would seriously prejudice the in-service government doctors and also impact the public health infrastructure in Tamil Nadu in an adverse manner.
Observations by the Supreme Court:
Responding to the argument, Justice Nagarathna observed, "All India Quota...that is not in-service candidates...Percentage has to be reduced because they are working...Other persons who are sitting at home take this...otherwise no government doctors [can take this]...they have to reduce the percentile..."
In response to this, the counsel informed the top court bench that after giving consent in Tamilveni's case, the Tamil Nadu Government has filed a review petition against the order passed by the Apex Court bench comprising Justice Narasimha.
Further, the counsel pointed out that in previous academic years, the qualifying percentile for NEET-SS was consistently reduced during the later stages of counselling and therefore, the surrender of seats to the All India Quota at this point could be seriously prejudicial.
Justice Nagarathna questioned the non-reduction in percentile this year, while highlighting that the in-service doctors lose out on merit as they are serving public alongside their study.
"In every State, there are in-service candidates. They are government doctors. They are there for public health. Cut-off for them must be lesser. Reason being, they are serving and studying. On the other hand there are students, when it comes to PG Diploma and...they are sitting at home and studying. They are not serving. In-service is a different channel. If you just give it up, how will State doctors benefit? It is for people of the State...public health. They are all working in State government hospitals. You just enable them to achieve greater skills...super-speciality. There must be, according to me, a lesser cutoff for them because they are working and studying. If All India [quota] takes away, how does it help the State doctors?" remarked Justice Nagarathna.
On the other hand, Advocate Mithu Jain, the counsel for the National Medical Commission (NMC), argued that the reversion of seats to the All India Quota flows from the Apex Court's order in the case of N Karthikeyan, which is sub judice.
In response to the NMC Counsel's argument that the subject provision (in-service reservation) is unique to Tamil Nadu, Justice Nagarathna responded by noting, "because it's State of Tamil Nadu, it can't be different...".
"A person who has asked for conversion [of seats] does not make the in-service candidate association a party and an ex parte order is taken from this court. They were not heard in the matter. What about their right to get the percentile reduced and there be a further round of counselling?" questioned the Judge.
Further, Justice Nagarathna clarified that the bench was not modifying the direction of the co-ordinate bench. The Judge stressed, "We are concerned with public health - whichever State it may be. In-service is a separate category of admission. You want 152 seats but you don't admit. They can't sit at home and study. Their merit comes down because they serve and study. If the Director General will reduce, it will benefit all in-service candidates all over the country. Not just Tamil Nadu."
Addressing the issue of the NEET-SS 2nd Round of Counselling (All India Quota), which has been kept on hold, the bench declined to record anything in the order.
"You follow that precedent where you reduced the percentile. Have a counselling for them. Remaining seats will be converted," Justice Nagarathna told the NMC counsel.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on July 15.
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.