NEET-PG to shift to rank-based system from 2027: Centre tells SC

The Centre is proposing a major change in how NEET-PG and NEET-SS admissions are decided. From 2027, candidates would be admitted according to their ranks rather than by meeting a percentile-based qualifying threshold. The National Medical Commission has given in-principle approval, but detailed rules are not finalised.

The proposal follows repeated cut-off reductions made to fill vacant postgraduate medical seats. In 2023, the qualifying percentile fell to zero across categories, making even candidates with negative marks eligible for counselling. Further reductions followed in 2024 and during the 2025-26 admission cycle.

The 12-member committee also recommended preserving minimum eligibility standards, reducing fees for non-clinical courses, and exempting pre-clinical and para-clinical candidates from service bonds. The Supreme Court has allowed petitioners time to respond. Final implementation depends on authorities framing rules and further court proceedings.

A percentile-based qualifying system measures a candidate’s performance relative to other test-takers. It sets a threshold, such as the 50th percentile, and candidates meeting that threshold become eligible for counselling. A candidate’s percentile shows how many test-takers they performed better than, but eligibility and seat allocation are separate steps.

A rank-based merit system instead orders candidates from higher performance to lower performance. Seats are offered according to that order, subject to the admission rules, available seats and counselling choices. In practical terms, rank directly indicates a candidate’s position in the competition.

The article proposes replacing the current percentile-based eligibility system for NEET-PG and NEET-SS with rank-based merit from 2027. This explanation of the distinction uses the standard meaning of these examination terms; the committee’s detailed rules, including how ranks and counselling will operate, are still pending.

The reduction in the NEET-PG qualifying cut-off made 95,913 additional candidates eligible for counselling. This figure was placed before the Supreme Court during the dispute over the revised eligibility rules.

The change occurred on January 13, 2026, when NBEMS revised the cut-off for the third counselling round. General candidates saw the qualifying percentile fall from 50th to 7th, while General PwD candidates saw it fall from 45th to 5th. For SC, ST and OBC candidates, it dropped from 40th percentile to zero. Candidates with negative marks could qualify under the revised criteria.

The reduction was made after many postgraduate medical seats remained vacant. Petitioners challenged the move, arguing that sharply lowering eligibility could conflict with maintaining the quality of postgraduate medical education. The committee later recommended a rank-based system and said minimum standards should not be reduced simply to fill seats.

NEET-PG qualifying cut-offs were repeatedly lowered to address vacant postgraduate medical seats during counselling. The reductions were intended to make more candidates eligible and help fill seats that remained unoccupied. The issue became recurring across admission cycles.

In 2023, the qualifying percentile was reduced to zero across categories, allowing candidates with negative marks to enter counselling. In 2024, it was lowered to the 15th percentile for General and EWS candidates and the 10th percentile for reserved categories. During the 2025-26 cycle, the threshold was reduced again in the third counselling round.

On January 13, 2026, General eligibility fell from the 50th to the 7th percentile, while reserved-category eligibility fell from the 40th percentile to zero. The Supreme Court questioned the effect on education quality and sought a lasting institutional solution. The committee now recommends rank-based admissions and stronger protection of minimum standards.

If minimum eligibility standards are sharply lowered, postgraduate medical education could face a weaker and less consistent entry standard. The article does not state that this outcome has occurred, but it records concerns that reduced qualifying requirements may affect the quality of medical education.

The concern became especially clear when the 2023 cut-off reached zero across categories. Candidates with negative marks could become eligible for counselling. In January 2026, the General cut-off fell from the 50th to the 7th percentile, while the SC, ST and OBC cut-off fell from the 40th percentile to zero.

The Supreme Court questioned whether such reductions were consistent with maintaining quality. The expert committee therefore recommended that standards should not be substantially reduced merely to fill vacant seats. Its proposed rank-based system is intended to address admissions difficulties while maintaining minimum eligibility standards.

Lower fees could make non-clinical postgraduate courses more affordable and therefore more attractive to eligible candidates. Exemptions from service bonds could remove another barrier for candidates choosing pre-clinical and para-clinical subjects. Together, these steps could improve the appeal of courses without changing examination standards.

Faster counselling could help candidates receive offers and complete admissions sooner. Better-timed counselling may also reduce delays that leave seats unfilled. The article identifies counselling delays and recurring vacancies as problems the committee wants to address.

These measures are recommendations, not confirmed results. Their purpose is to expand interest and improve the admission process while keeping minimum eligibility standards intact. The committee also proposed lower fees specifically for non-clinical postgraduate courses and service-bond exemptions for pre-clinical and para-clinical candidates. Final rules and implementation details remain pending.

In a competitive entrance system, a rank places each candidate in an order based on examination performance. A cut-off sets the minimum eligibility point for entering the next stage. Counselling then uses eligible candidates’ order and choices to offer available seats.

For example, candidates with stronger ranks are generally considered earlier when seats and preferred courses are allocated. Candidates choose among available options during counselling, while later candidates receive offers from the seats still open. If too few candidates qualify or counselling is delayed, seats can remain vacant.

The NEET-PG dispute concerns how eligibility should be set before counselling begins. The current system uses percentile thresholds, which were repeatedly reduced to fill vacancies. The proposed system would use rank-based merit from 2027. The article does not provide the final allocation rules, so the exact counselling mechanism remains to be framed by authorities.