New Delhi, Nov. 4 -- An expert panel set up by the Union health ministry proposed on Tuesday sweeping changes in the national postgraduate medical entrance examination, including replacing the existing percentile-based qualifying system with a rank-based merit system, reducing fees for non-clinical courses, revising medical residents' stipends, and preventing seat blocking through biometric verification. In an affidavit filed by the health ministry before the Supreme Court, the panel also recommended no salary discrimination between clinical and non-clinical branches, increments after super-speciality, and incentives for those working in rural areas, while noting that health is a state subject under the Constitution. "NMC is in the process of issuing new regulations, which are yet to be finalised wherein only rank-based system for NEET-PG and NEET-SS counselling will be adopted, no percentile marks will be declared in results, only ranks will be given to candidates," the affidavit said, referring to the National Medical Commission, India's apex medical regulatory body. "The sanctity of NEET examinations should be maintained and minimum qualifying standards in postgraduate medical education is not diluted to the extent of permitting candidates with grossly inadequate or negative performance to become eligible for admission. The significance of competitive examinations should not be reduced to an administrative formality," it added. The affidavit was filed by Dr Praveen Kumar Dass, assistant director general, ministry of health and family welfare (MoHFW). "We have made these reforms in the interest of the candidates...The new reforms will also reduce the counselling time and which will subsequently help candidates to start their academic session on time," an official aware of the matter from DGHS, said. A senior NMC official said, "The proposal in principle is approved. However, we will wait for the court's final directions to go ahead for the new reforms, once that happens the next process is to get stakeholders suggestions for the implementation of reforms." The proposed reforms are targeted for implementation from the 2027 counselling cycle, subject to finalisation of regulations and necessary approvals. "The feasibility study of sharing of results on-line with DMEs and State Counselling Authorities is being investigated forthe academic year 2027 so that the result data of NEET (UG/PG/ MDS/ SS) will be sharedwith DMEs and State Counselling Authorities," reads the affidavit. For the upcoming 2027 cycle, the expert panel and the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) have outlined targeted operational guidelines to completely digitise the admission architecture. The National Eligibility cum Entrance Exam (NEET), postgraduate - distinct from the NEET-UG exam - was taken by 265,980 candidates to fill 63,177 postgraduate medical seats for 2026-27. It also called for online sharing of NEET-PG and other medical entrance examination results with state counselling authorities, digitising the counselling process with minimum human intervention, and ensuring that the NMC shares an updated and verified seat matrix with the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) well before counselling begins In 2025, the exam was held on August 3, 2025, and taken by 230,114 candidates. The first two rounds of counselling were completed by December 28 . But on January 13, 2026, the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) - the autonomous body under the health ministry that conducts NEET-PG - lowered the qualifying percentile for reserved categories to zero, making candidates scoring as low as minus 40 out of 800 eligible for admission. For candidates belonging to the SC, ST and OBCs, the qualifying percentile was reduced from the prescribed 40th percentile (235 marks out of 800) to zero percentile (minus 40 marks). For general and Economically Weaker Section candidates, it was reduced from the 50th percentile (276 marks) to the seventh percentile (103 marks) to fill around 18,000 vacant seats after the second round of counselling. At a December 30 meeting, officials of the health ministry and the NMC discussed the anticipated vacancies and decided to relax the qualifying percentile to expand the pool of candidates eligible for the third round. The following day, NBEMS issued the revised cut-off notification. The decision sparked a controversy and social worker Harisharan Devgan and doctors Saurav Kumar, Lakshya Mittal and Akash Soni approached the Supreme Court on January 16. The petition challenged the NBEMS notice dated January 13, 2026, which reduced the qualifying cut-offs for the third round of NEET-PG 2025-26 counselling. The petitioners argued that allowing candidates with zero or negative scores to become eligible for postgraduate medical admissions diluted minimum standards, compromised merit and could affect patient safety and public health. The petition sought quashing of the January 13 NBEMS notification and stay on counselling being conducted under the revised cut-offs. The top court issued notice on the petition on February 4 and on February 6, asking the Centre to file an affidavit explaining the rationale for the reduction. It said there had to be a balance between preventing seats from going vacant and maintaining standards in medical education. Following the top court's May 4 directions to create an institutional mechanism to examine recurring issues in the NEET-PG admission process, the health ministry constituted a 12-member expert committee on July 23, headed by the Director General of Health Services (DGHS) chairperson Dr Loveneesh G Krishna, and also comprising representatives from the NMC, NBEMS and the MCC, among others. Under the existing percentile-based system, candidates qualify for postgraduate medical admissions by securing a prescribed minimum percentile, which indicates their relative performance compared with other candidates. The qualifying threshold can be lowered by the authorities to make more candidates eligible when seats remain vacant. Under the new proposal, candidates would be ranked according to their examination performance and admissions conducted onthe basis of this ranking, instead of lowering the qualifying percentile to make more candidates eligible. NMC secretary Dr Raghav Langer communicated the decision to the DGHS on October 1, according to the affidavit filed in the top court. The proposal is yet to be incorporated into final regulations and formally notified. To address vacancies in less sought-after postgraduate disciplines, the committee recommended that state fee fixation committees consider lower fees for pre-clinical and para-clinical courses than for clinical branches. Clinical specialities such as general medicine, surgery and paediatrics are generally preferred for their direct patient-care roles and perceived wider career and earning opportunities. In contrast, pre-clinical and para-clinical disciplines, including anatomy, physiology, biochemistry and microbiology, are more closely associated with teaching, research, laboratory work and diagnostics, and often attract fewer candidates. "The fee of non-clinical branches may be little less so that the candidates feel encouraged to accept the seat and this wastage of medical seats may be prevented," the report said. It also recommended considering exemptions from compulsory bonds for candidates taking admission to pre-clinical and para-clinical subjects, but left it to states to take a call in this regard. On residents' remuneration, the panel called for addressing disparities in stipends between clinical and non-clinical branches and suggested incentives for doctors willing to serve in rural areas. States have been advised to consult stakeholders and review bond policies, including their duration and monetary provisions. For BDS and BSc Nursing courses, the committee flagged vacancies and recommended improving employment opportunities for graduates. It also suggested considering the discontinuation of seats that remain vacant for two to three consecutive years and rationalising fees. The committee recommended that NBEMS and NTA explore KYC and biometric verification during entrance examinations to prevent candidates from appearing multiple times to block seats. It also called for greater digitisation of counselling, with minimum human intervention, and asked the MCC to develop a standardised project charter setting out the responsibilities of stakeholders and procedures to be followed. It further recommended that the NMC provide the seat matrix to the MCC well before counselling begins, and that the MCC prepare summary reports after each counselling exercise and hold stakeholder meetings before and after every round. Some experts questioned the recommendations. "Qualifying percentile is not a mere administrative formality, it is the minimum benchmark intended to safeguard academic standards and ultimately the quality of specialists in healthcare. It will be a huge injustice with merit if minimum admission criteria are diluted drastically," said Dr Raj Shekhar Yadav, one of the petitioners in the case. "Changing the examination formula does not erase the questions surrounding the drastic reduction of qualifying cut-offs. Vacant seats cannot become an excuse to compromise merit, dilute qualifying standards or experiment with the future of medical education," said Dr Dhruv Chauhan, chairperson of the Legal Cell for All India Doctors....