Published Feb 18, 2026 | 8:02 AM ⚊ Updated Feb 18, 2026 | 8:02 AM
The apex court was hearing a petition challenging the decision.
Synopsis: The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences has told the Supreme Court that the decision to reduce NEET-PG 2025–26 qualifying percentiles was taken by the Union Health Ministry and that it had “no role whatsoever”. The apex court was hearing a petition challenging the decision, which allowed SC, ST and OBC candidates with 0th percentile and even negative scores to secure postgraduate medical seats across the country.
The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) has told the Supreme Court that it had “no role whatsoever” in the decision to slash NEET-PG 2025-26 qualifying percentiles. The decision allowed SC/ST/OBC candidates with 0th percentile and even negative scores to secure postgraduate medical seats across the country.
In an affidavit filed on 16 February in response to a petition, Sanchit Seth vs NBEMS, challenging the percentile reduction, NBEMS told the court that the decision “falls exclusively within the domain of the Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare and the National Medical Commission.”
It said its role was limited to receiving an instruction, publishing a notice and forwarding revised results to the Medical Counselling Committee.
Court documents lay out the timeline of the decision-making process. On 17 December 2025, Round 2 counselling concluded with about 9,000 seats vacant.
Thirteen days later, on 30 December, officials of the National Medical Commission and the Ministry of Health met to review eligibility criteria. At that meeting, they decided to reduce the cut-offs.
On 9 January, the Ministry communicated the decision to NBEMS. On 13 January, NBEMS published the impugned notice and forwarded the revised results to the Medical Counselling Committee.
Under the original criteria, 1,28,116 candidates were eligible. The revised criteria made an additional 95,913 candidates eligible—41,918 in the General category, 32,664 OBC, 13,710 SC and 7,621 ST—bringing the total to 2,24,029.
In effect, the revised criteria declared almost everyone who sat the exam eligible for postgraduate medical seats.
Notably, documents from an earlier Delhi High Court order dismissing the same petitions show that on 12 January 2026, one day before the NBEMS notice, the IMA wrote to the Ministry and NBEMS seeking relaxation in qualifying criteria, citing the large number of vacant seats.
This is despite the IMA consistently advocating against lowered standards and for maintaining professional autonomy in medical education.
Dr D Srinath Dubyala, National President of FAIMA, had previously said: “Our position is clear. Maintain standards. Do not dilute merit. Conduct the exam twice a year instead of lowering the bar.”
Former IMA National President Dr RV Asokan had also warned that increasing interference in the examination process by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare was creating uncertainty.
“The turbulence began after the controversies surrounding NEET-UG. Once that examination came under intense scrutiny, the atmosphere changed. The ministry began to exercise greater control over decisions, including scheduling and postponements. Earlier, such decisions were handled independently by the Board,” he said.
“Increased interference, often without fully appreciating the nuances of postgraduate examinations, contributed to uncertainty.”
Whether the IMA sought a moderate reduction rather than the zero-percentile outcome that followed is not clear from the public record.
(Edited by Dese Gowda)
