Expert Panel Tells Supreme Court NMC Backs Rank-Based Merit List for NEET-PG, Ending Percentile Scores

India's medical postgraduate admissions may soon run on ranks alone.

A 12-member expert committee told the Supreme Court in a report filed Tuesday, Nov. 3, that the National Medical Commission (NMC) has given in-principle approval to replace the percentile-based system with a rank-based merit list for both NEET-PG and NEET-Super Speciality (SS) counselling. Under the plan, results would show a candidate's rank and no percentile score.

What the NMC has and has not done

The proposal was approved in principle at an NMC meeting on Sept. 23. An Oct. 1, 2026 letter from the NMC secretary to the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS) informed the government of the proposed change.

The regulation is not final. The report says the NMC is in the process of issuing it, and a draft is expected to go out shortly for stakeholder consultation.

The committee said it gave in-principle approval to the change "with a view to address the issues arising from the existing system." The report does not spell out in the passages made public what exactly those issues are.

The cut-off that triggered the review

The committee exists because of a court fight over NEET-PG 2025. The Union Health Ministry sharply cut the qualifying percentile cut-offs. The qualifying score for the general category fell from 276 to 103. For SC/ST/OBC candidates it fell from 235 to minus 40.

That is a negative score. A candidate could qualify for a postgraduate medical seat after scoring below zero.

A bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe questioned the cut. According to Bar & Bench, the bench observed that it appeared to affect the quality of medical education. The court said it would examine the decision even though it is a policy matter.

The court directed the Centre to carry out a comprehensive audit of the NEET admission system, identify gaps and recommend practical fixes. The expert committee's report responds to that direction. It was filed after consultation with senior advocate Maninder Singh, who is assisting the court as amicus curiae.

Standards language in the report

The committee said qualifying percentiles had been lowered by competent authorities depending on the number of vacant seats. It also said minimum standards must hold.

In its words, minimum qualifying standards should not be diluted "to the extent of permitting candidates with grossly inadequate or negative performance to become eligible for admission." It added that the significance of competitive examinations "should not be reduced to an administrative formality."

The Centre's affidavit, filed Tuesday, acknowledged that maintaining standards in postgraduate medical education is important.

Petitioner says the filing does not answer the question

The petitioner's side is not satisfied. Advocate Satyam Singh Rajput told the court the affidavit does not explain the drastic reduction in qualifying marks. He argued that there is hardly any change in the admission process.

A switch to ranks changes how results are displayed. Rajput's argument is that it does not account for why the bar was dropped to minus 40 in the first place.

The committee's summary does not say the rank-based system will set a minimum qualifying mark. Whether the new regulation will address a floor on scores is not stated.

Vacant seats and the other recommendations

The committee tied much of its work to a recurring problem: postgraduate medical seats that go unfilled. Its recommendations include:

• Lower fees for non-clinical courses, with state fee-fixation committees or competent authorities considering different fee structures for clinical and non-clinical branches.
• Exempting candidates who take pre-clinical and para-clinical seats from service bonds.
• Having states study stipend disparities between residents in clinical and non-clinical branches, with no salary discrimination between them.
• Incentives for doctors willing to work in rural areas, and a reconsideration of existing service bond policies.
• Discouraging additional counselling rounds, which it said lengthen the overall counselling period.
• Exploring biometric verification to stop candidates from blocking seats, which the committee identified as a major cause of large vacancies.

The report also addresses counselling delays and notes that the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) has already introduced several changes this year to reduce them.

What comes next

The immediate test is the draft regulation. Once the NMC releases it for stakeholder consultation, it will show whether ranks-only reporting comes with any minimum qualifying standard. The Supreme Court is still examining the petitions against the 2025 cut-off reduction, and the committee's report is now before it.