Policy Failure! Outrage over NEET PG 2025 reduced cutoff escalates
New Delhi: Opposition against the National Board of Examinations (NBE) decision to reduce the cut-off for the National Eligibility Entrance Test Postgraduate (NEET PG) 2025 examination is further intensifying, with doctors expressing their opinion on the matter on social media platforms.
NBE in a notice dated 13.01.2026, reduced the minimum qualifying percentile cut-off for counselling of the third round of National Eligibility-Entrance Test Postgraduate (NEET-PG) 2025-2026 for various categories of candidates.
As per the revised qualifying percentiles for NEET-PG 2025, for the academic session 2025-2026, for the General/EWS, General PwBD, SC/ST/OBC(Including PwBD of SC/ST/OBC) categories, the revised qualifying cut-off is 7th, 5th, and 0th percentile, respectively. Therefore, the revised cut-off score after lowering the cut-off percentile is 103 for General/EWS, 90 for General PwBD, and -40 for SC/ST/OBC(Including PwBD of SC/ST/OBC) categories, respectively.
Strongly opposing this decision, a section of the medical fraternity has pointed out that after the cut-off reduction, even those who scored -40 marks in the exam will be eligible to take admission in the highly sought-after clinical specialities, which, according to doctors, will compromise merit.
According to the Chief Patron of the Federation of All India Medical Association (FAIMA), Dr. Rohan Krishnan, this is not a merit issue, but actually a 'policy failure'. Pointing out how empty seats worth crores of rupees are resulting in the sacrifice of medical education standards, Dr. Krirshnan mentioned in an X post, "Patients will pay the price!!! –40 marks to qualify NEET-PG??? PG seats are vacant due to delayed counselling, bond traps, and CRORE-₹ private fees — NOT lack of merit!!!!!!! Diluting standards won’t fix policy failure Lower competence today = unsafe patients tomorrow!!! WHY are PG seats vacant & WHY is –40 marks alarming??"
"This is NOT a merit issue — it’s a POLICY FAILURE!!! Faulty counselling timelines!!! Repeated delays push mid-rankers to wait instead of taking high-fee private seats Arbitrary bond policies!!! Non-uniform, unscientific state bonds scare doctors away from PG seats Exorbitant private fees!!! Clinical PG seats costing CRORES ₹₹₹ — beyond the reach of most doctors Wrong solution to wrong problem??? If vacancies were mainly NON-CLINICAL, why slash cut-offs across ALL branches, including CLINICAL specialties that affect patient lives," his X post further mentioned.
According to him, the most uncomfortable question is that "Doctors scoring –40 / 800 are already MBBS-registered practitioners." Referring to this, he asked NMC, PMO and Union health Minister Shri J P Nadda what this suggests about MBBS training & evaluation systems. "Vacant seats need POLICY CORRECTION — NOT COMPETENCE DILUTION!!!" he opined.
Recently, pointing out how the reduction of cut-off to zero percentile and allowing candidates scoring even -40 to pursue the PG medical courses and become specialist doctors is a "blow to meritocracy" and a "direct threat to patient safety and public health", the doctors under the Federation of Resident Doctors Association (FORDA) and the Federation of All India Medical Association (FAIMA) have urged the Union Health Minister, Shri J P Nadda, to reverse this decision.
Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that while FORDA has suggested setting up a high-level committee comprising the National Medical Commission (NMC) and NBE to review and standardise cutoff policies transparently, FAIMA has warned that if the authorities fail to take timely "corrective action", it will be compelled to initiate nationwide protests in consultation with the resident doctors and medical associations across the country.
Now, the National Federation of Resident Doctors of All AIIMS & INI's, Democratic Medical Association, Telangana Senior Resident Doctors Association (TSRDA), Healthcare Reforms Doctors Association (HRDA), have also expressed their disappointment over the decision to reduce the NEET-PG cut-off.
Urging the Union Health Minister to review and roll back the decision, the Democratic Medical Association (DMA), has pointed out that the revised cutoffs disproportionately benefit private medical institutions by enabling seat filling with lower-scoring candidates at exorbitant costs, shifting focus from merit to commercial interests.
"Such decisions risk eroding public trust in the medical profession at a time when confidence in healthcare must be strengthened," it mentioned in a letter addressed to the Union Health Minister Shri J P Nadda.
The National Federation of Resident Doctors of AIIMS and INIs (NAFORD) has also expressed its serious concern and strong disapproval over the decision to reduce the qualifying cut-off for postgraduate medical admissions to "academically indefensible levels, extending even to 0 percentile (-40 marks)."
In a letter addressed to the Union Health Minister, the association pointed out that any compromise in postgraduate medical education directly undermines patient safety, public trust, and national healthcare standards.
Urging the minister to roll back the cut-off reduction, the association added, "Lowering eligibility thresholds to negative marks, ostensibly to fill vacant seats, sets a dangerous precedent, conveying that academic competence is negotiable and encouraging unchecked commercialisation by private institutions. The consequences of this dilution will be felt at the patient's bedside. Resident doctors are the backbone of tertiary and teaching hospitals, and admitting underprepared candidates into postgraduate training will compromise clinical judgement and decision-making, placing vulnerable patients at unacceptable risk."
"Equally conceming is the erosion of the international standing of Indian medical graduates. India's reputation for rigorous, merit-based training will suffer if candidates with negligible demonstrated competence are allowed into specialist programmes. We emphasise that administrative challenges such as counselling delays or seat vacancies cannot be resolved by sacrificing academic standards. Expediency must never supersede excellence in a profession where errors cost lives," it further mentioned.
Writing to Shri Nadda, Healthcare Reforms Doctors Association (HRDA) argued that allowing candidates with negative scores to qualify is unprecedented and deeply alarming. Such a move dilutes the very purpose of the examination, undermines merit, and raises serious concerns regarding the future quality of specialist medical care in the country.
The letter from HRDA mentioned, "While maintaining a healthy UG seats : PG seats ratio is essential for workforce planning, we strongly emphasize that unchecked and irrational expansion of both undergraduate and postgraduate seats without parallel development of infrastructure, teaching hospitals, faculty, and clinical material is detrimental to medical education. Seat expansion must be need-based, quality-oriented, and aligned with the capacity of institutions to provide meaningful training—not driven by numerical targets alone...Lowering qualifying standards to accommodate excess seats, instead of correcting infrastructural and regulatory shortcomings, sets a dangerous precedent. It compromises the merit-based foundation of postgraduate medical admissions and poses a direct threat to patient safety and public health outcomes."
In the letter, the association has urged the Union Government to revoke the current notification permitting negative-mark qualification, restore a fair, rational, and merit-based cutoff, and urgently review and regulate UG and PG seat expansion by enforcing strict infrastructure, faculty, hospital strength, and clinical training standards.
Telangana Senior Resident Doctors Association (TSRDA) has warned to initiate nationwide protests if no corrective action is taken by the Government. In a letter addressed to Shri J P Nadda, the association mentioned, "This decision raises serious concerns about the quality of future specialists and poses a direct threat to patient safety and public health, particularly affecting the poor and vulnerable sections of society who depend on government and teaching hospitals. Furthermore, such a drastic reduction creates an impression that conducting a national competitive examination like NEET-PG may soon become redundant, as admissions could be granted irrespective of merit, rank, or eligibility. Lowering educational standards merely to fill vacant seats in certain private medical colleges is unacceptable and sets a harmful precedent for the future of India’s medical education system."
Outrage on Social Media
Reacting to NBE's decision to reduce the cut-off to as low as zero percentile, a doctor wrote in an X post, "Why do we need to impose cutoffs at all? Let us adopt a 'first-come, first-served' model—or better still an open-access system for entrance to all postgraduate medical courses . In a profession often described as 'godlike,' - क्यों कोई भगवान बनने से वंचित रहे! Lord save the country !"
"The healthcare of the Nation is going into gutter ! Save it before it’s too late," an X post by Health Activist Dr. Dhruv Chauhan read.
Trying to find the reason for so many vacant seats, a doctor wrote, "Govt needs to pay non clinical branches much much better. Only then will people take them up . .this will help new colleges as well. The vacant PG seats have to be filled. They are mostly non clinical branches. Nobody wants to take them apparently."
