Medical aspirants breathed a very long sigh of relief after the Supreme Court (SC) directed that the NEET PG 2025 examination be conducted in a single shift, addressing concerns over fairness and transparency.
However, their excitement was short-lived as the National Board of Examinations (NBE) announced the postponement of the exam to August 3, on June 2, 2025.
The court will hear the pleas again soon as several critical issues remain unresolved concerning the exam's conduct and future processes.
Initially, the petition had challenged several aspects of the NEET PG 2025 exam:
Two-shift conduct: The petition questions the rationale behind holding the exam in two shifts, citing a lack of transparency and justification.
Normalisation process: The adoption of a normalisation method borrowed from AIIMS UG (All India Institutes of Medical Sciences - Undergraduate) exams is contested as inappropriate for the postgraduate exam due to the complexity and subject distribution.
Transparency and fairness: The petition claims the normalisation process is arbitrary, non-transparent, and violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
Specific grievances: Candidates have faced discrepancies in results due to varying difficulty levels between shifts, the absence of answer keys, response sheets, and a grievance redressal mechanism. The normalisation formula and any expert recommendations behind it have not been disclosed.
Now that the two-shift problem has been resolved, petitioners urge the Supreme Court to direct the NBE to ensure transparency and fairness in future NEET PG examinations.
Dr Dhruv Chauhan, National Spokesperson of the Indian Medical Association - Junior Doctors' Association, stressed the importance of transparency, calling it vital for a "corruption-free" and "scam-free" exam.
He highlighted that the absence of answer keys prevents candidates from verifying their performance.
Dr Chauhan expressed hope that the Supreme Court's order would lead to the release of answer keys this time.
Regarding the double shift issue, he said, "The double shift issue has been resolved with our continuous and dedicated efforts, which was necessary to prevent discrimination based on exam difficulty."
Advocate Satyam Singh Rajput, representing United Doctors' Front (UDF), referred to the ongoing case and emphasised the need for NBE to provide question papers, answer keys, and response sheets to candidates for transparency and performance verification.
However, NBE had previously resisted disclosing question papers during the State of UP vs Bhavana Tiwari & others case, citing limited question pools rotated annually.
In response, Dr Chauhan criticised NBE's stance, saying, "They just do not understand medicine… This is a never-ending course; no matter how many questions you develop, you can create even more for the upcoming hundred years. It is just that they are very lazy and do not want to work."
When asked about the impact of these issues on trust and the exam process, Dr Chauhan noted that the postponement would affect resident doctors currently pursuing courses, as the delay would overburden them.
He added that the overall schedule for students completing residency would be pushed back.
Advocate Satyam expressed optimism about the court's response.
He said, "There is nothing wrong if you are taking the exam. We have the right to know which question is wrong or right, whether I am wrong or not, or whether the system is wrong. Several exams like the Judiciary and UPSC provide such clarity."
The Supreme Court's next hearing is expected to address the NBE's plea for postponement and several critical concerns, shaping the future conduct and transparency of the NEET PG examinations.
