![JMA – Ninja & Deep Jandu [Official MV] Kaptaan](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/-dsfIh319s0/maxresdefault.jpg "JMA – Ninja & Deep Jandu [Official MV] Kaptaan")
New Delhi: A steep cut in NEET-PG qualifying standards has led to postgraduate medical seats in govt colleges being filled at shockingly low scores – including in high-risk clinical specialties – triggering alarm across the medical fraternity, reports Anuja Jaiswal.
The impact was stark in third-round PG counselling, where candidates secured seats in govt medical colleges with scores ranging from single digits to double digits, spanning both clinical and non-clinical disciplines. Even premier institutions and core clinical branches saw seats being allotted to candidates with such scores.
An MS orthopaedics seat at a govt institute in Rohtak was allotted to a candidate with just 4 marks out of 800, while obstetrics and gynaecology at a premier Delhi medical college went to a candidate who scored 44 marks. A general surgery seat was filled at 47 marks.
Removing cut-offs altogether risks patient safety, says doc
This signals a serious breakdown in medical education and workforce planning,” said a senior faculty member at a govt medical college. “Orthopaedics has traditionally been among the most demanding surgical specialties. Filling it at near-zero scores is a sign not of weaker students but a system under severe strain.”
This happened following the sharp lowering of NEET-PG qualifying standards by Union health ministry for the 2025–26 academic session, with drastically reduced cut-offs across categories allowing candidates with extremely low — and even negative — scores to qualify.
The effect was visible across disciplines. Seats were filled at 10 marks in transfusion medicine, 11 marks in anatomy, and minus 8 marks in biochemistry, many under reserved and PwD categories. While the revised cut-offs ensured that seats did not remain vacant, doctors warn the policy risks trading competence for convenience.
“Allowing surgical and clinical branches to be filled at zero or near-zero percentile represents a serious erosion of standards,” said a senior doctor at a govt medical college. “Marks as low as 4, 11, 44 or 47 out of 800 point to a lack of basic aptitude. Removing cut-offs altogether directly risks patient safety.”
The current policy marks a sharp shift from govt’s earlier stand. In July 2022, opposing a plea to lower NEET-PG cut-offs in Delhi HC, Centre had argued that minimum qualifying percentiles were essential to maintain education standards. The court agreed, warning that lowering medical education standards could “wreak havoc on society”, as medicine involved matters of life and death.
Defending the present framework, a senior health ministry official said PG seats are allotted strictly under revised eligibility rules, and competence is intended to be ensured through training and exit exams, not entry cut-offs alone. Colleges are certified by regulators and are responsible for failing unsuitable candidates, the official said.
Medical educators, however, say the trend reflects deeper structural problems — rapid seat expansion without a matching rise in trained faculty, overcrowded classrooms and eroding bedside skills. “Without strong faculty, robust exit exams and a system to weed out unsuitable candidates, anyone who enters medicine eventually gets a degree,” said a senior academician.
Faculty members say the consequences are already visible. Many postgraduate students arrive without strong theoretical foundations, clinical skills or discipline. Pressure to pass students, weak exit mechanisms and over-reliance on online learning have further diluted training quality.
“Easy entry has reduced seriousness even at top institutions,” said another doctor on condition of anonymity. “Numbers are rising, but training quality is falling — and that poses long-term risks to patient care.”
Doctors caution that the branch of medicine does not reveal its failures immediately. Gaps in training today may surface years later, when these doctors practise independently — with serious implications for patient safety and public trust in the healthcare system.
