The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) has stirred up fresh controversy by lowering the NEET PG 2024 qualifying percentile to just the 5th percentile across all categories.
This move, announced during the stray vacancy round, has divided opinions — some see it as a necessary step to fill vacant seats, while others fear it could dilute medical education standards.
While supporters argue that such measures increase access to medical education, critics worry that they undermine meritocracy. But does a lower percentile really mean admitting “undeserving” candidates, or is that an oversimplification?
Debunking the ‘undeserving’ tag
Dr Manish Patil, Head of Anatomy at RD Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, dismisses the notion that a lower percentile means lower competence. “Students aim for clinical branches, but with rising competition and multiple attempts, many settle for non-clinical fields, which are usually the last to be filled,” he explains and adds, “By the time the cut-off is lowered, the top scorers have already secured their preferred specialities. So, this change doesn’t necessarily disadvantage deserving candidates.”
He also emphasises that medical education isn’t defined by a single entrance test. “Merit is more than just an exam score. Every student has unique strengths, and with reservation policies already setting different cut-offs, calling someone ‘undeserving’ based on percentile alone is misleading,” he points out.
Filling seats or lowering standards?
Dr Pratibha Lakshmi, Associate Professor of General Medicine, highlights a key issue — India’s expanding medical infrastructure.
“New medical colleges are being approved, sometimes without adequate faculty or facilities. The government is focused on increasing the number of doctors, but the quality of education hasn’t kept pace,” she says and adds, “With so many vacant seats, lowering the cut-off has become inevitable.”
She also counters the meritocracy argument. “Getting a seat is just the beginning. Students still have to complete their postgraduation, clear tough exams, and prove themselves in practice. Medicine isn’t a field where you can simply ‘get by’,” she says.
‘Don’t judge us by a three-hour exam’
Dr Abhiniti, a candidate participating in the reduced-percentile rounds, shares her experience. “I was pregnant while preparing, which affected my studies. Does that make me undeserving?” she asks.
“I’ve completed my MBBS, passed the FMG exam, and I practice medicine. A three-hour exam doesn’t define my ability to be a good doctor,” she says.
She also questions the bias against non-clinical branches. “Do we think the professors who teach these subjects are undeserving? If these fields weren’t crucial, they wouldn’t be part of the curriculum. Not everyone wants to be a surgeon or a pediatrician; some choose non-clinical branches because of increasing violence against doctors in clinical practice,” she says.
Why non-clinical seats remain vacant
Dr Bharat Pareek, President of United Doctors Front (UDF) Rajasthan, sheds light on why non-clinical branches often go unfilled.
“It’s not radiology or dermatology seats that are left vacant, but subjects like anatomy. These are essential for medical education, yet they’re overlooked. Lowering the percentile helps attract students to these fields and addresses the severe faculty shortage,” Dr Pareek says.
Dr Patil adds that the corporatisation of healthcare has reshaped career choices. “In the past, doctors built their own clinics and gained recognition. Now, corporate hospitals dominate, making it tough for first-generation doctors to start independent practices. Many see academic roles in non-clinical fields as a more stable option.”
Striking a balance between opportunity and standards
The percentile reduction has sparked a critical debate: Is it a practical way to fill seats and meet India’s healthcare demands, or does it set a worrying precedent for medical education standards? While it offers opportunities to students facing personal hardships, it also raises concerns about long-term implications for healthcare quality.
Ultimately, the real challenge isn’t just about entrance exam cut-offs. As India expands its medical infrastructure, ensuring both accessibility and quality is the key. Experts argue that the true test of merit isn’t a percentile score, it’s how well doctors are trained, tested, and, most importantly, how they serve society.
