Opposition Grows Against NEET PG 2025 Cut-off Reduction

Background of the NBE Decision

In a recent notice dated January 13, 2026, the National Board of Examinations (NBE) announced a reduction in the minimum qualifying percentile cut-off for the National Eligibility Entrance Test Postgraduate (NEET PG) 2025 examination. This decision has sparked significant opposition among the medical community, with many doctors voicing their concerns on social media.

Revised Cut-off Percentiles

For the academic session 2025-2026, the new qualifying percentiles for NEET PG 2025 are as follows: General/EWS category at the 7th percentile, General PwBD at the 5th percentile, and SC/ST/OBC (including PwBD of SC/ST/OBC) at the 0th percentile. Consequently, the adjusted cut-off scores are 103 for General/EWS, 90 for General PwBD, and -40 for the SC/ST/OBC categories.

Concerns from the Medical Fraternity

The decision to allow candidates with negative marks to qualify for admissions into sought-after clinical specialties has raised alarms regarding meritocracy. A faction of the medical community argues that this move compromises the quality of medical education and patient safety. Dr. Rohan Krishnan, Chief Patron of the Federation of All India Medical Association (FAIMA), labeled this situation a ‘policy failure,’ stating that empty seats resulting from poor policy decisions threaten to degrade medical education standards.

Criticism of Current Policies

Dr. Krishnan emphasized that the underlying issues, including delayed counseling and exorbitant private fees, are not related to a lack of merit. He stressed that diluting standards would not resolve these policy failures and could lead to unsafe patient care. He questioned the implications of allowing MBBS-registered practitioners with negative scores to enter postgraduate training, highlighting the need for policy correction rather than competence dilution.

Calls for Reversal of the Decision

Doctors from the Federation of Resident Doctors Association (FORDA) and FAIMA have urged Union Health Minister Shri J P Nadda to reverse this cut-off reduction. They argue that permitting candidates scoring as low as -40 to pursue postgraduate medical courses undermines meritocracy and poses a direct threat to patient safety and public health.

Responses from Medical Associations

Various associations, including the National Federation of Resident Doctors of AIIMS and INIs, the Democratic Medical Association (DMA), and the Healthcare Reforms Doctors Association (HRDA), have expressed their strong disapproval of the cut-off reduction. They argue that this decision disproportionately benefits private medical institutions by allowing them to fill seats with lower-scoring candidates, thereby prioritizing commercial interests over merit.

Concerns About Future Medical Standards

The DMA pointed out that such measures risk eroding public trust in the medical profession at a time when healthcare confidence is paramount. They urged the minister to review and roll back the decision, emphasizing that any compromise in postgraduate medical education would undermine patient safety and national healthcare standards.

Potential Consequences of the Decision

The HRDA highlighted the unprecedented nature of allowing candidates with negative scores to qualify, warning that this could dilute the examination’s purpose and raise serious concerns about the future quality of specialist medical care in the country.

Social Media Reactions

The response on social media has been fervent, with many doctors expressing outrage. One user questioned the necessity of cut-offs altogether, suggesting a more open-access system for postgraduate medical courses. Others pointed out that addressing compensation for non-clinical branches could help fill vacant seats in those areas.

Conclusion

The reduction of the NEET PG 2025 cut-off has ignited significant debate within the medical community, raising critical questions about the future of medical education and patient safety in India. As calls for policy corrections intensify, the implications of this decision will likely continue to resonate throughout the healthcare system.