Allahabad High Court Rejects PIL Challenging Drastic Cut-Off Reduction in NEET-PG 2025 Counselling
The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) that questioned the decision of the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) to permit counselling for SC, ST, and OBC candidates who scored as low as minus 40 marks out of 800 in the NEET-PG 2025 examination.
The petition was turned down by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra.
During the hearing, the court was informed that a similar PIL had already been dismissed by the Delhi High Court, which held that the issue fell within the domain of policy-making and was not open to judicial interference.
The bench was also told that another petition on the same matter is pending before the Supreme Court, where the apex court has so far declined to intervene.
Taking note of these developments, the Allahabad High Court refused to entertain the plea and dismissed it.
The PIL had been filed by advocate Abhinav Gaur, who argued that the steep reduction in qualifying marks violated Article 16 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality of opportunity in public employment.
He contended that lowering the cut-off to such an extent undermines the merit-based selection process that forms the backbone of medical education and recruitment.
According to the petition, after over 18,000 postgraduate medical seats remained vacant following the second round of counselling, NBEMS sharply lowered the eligibility criteria to fill the remaining vacancies.
The plea highlighted that the cut-off in the general (EWS) category was reduced from 276 marks to 103, while for the general Persons with Benchmark Disabilities (PwBD) category,y it was brought down from 255 to 90.
However, the most drastic change was in the SC/ST/OBC category, where the qualifying score was reduced from 235 to minus 40.
The petitioner argued that such a steep relaxation could seriously compromise academic standards and the quality of medical professionals entering the healthcare system.
He warned that allowing candidates with extremely low scores to pursue postgraduate medical education could pose risks to public health and patient safety — areas that demand the highest level of competence and precision.
The PIL further claimed that admitting candidates who fail to meet even a basic academic threshold could infringe upon the fundamental right to life and health guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Despite these concerns, the High Court chose not to interfere, reiterating that decisions regarding eligibility criteria and cut-offs fall under the policy domain of examination authorities.
#AllahabadHighCourt #NEETPG2025 #MedicalEducation #CutOffControversy #NBEMS #PublicInterestLitigation #HealthcareStandards #JudicialUpdate #StudentAdmissions #ConstitutionalDebate
