Key facts
- Supreme Court favours lower NEET-SS percentile for in-service government doctors
- Bench observed in-service doctors cannot study at home like fresh graduates
- Case concerns super-speciality medical admissions
- Final ruling is yet to be delivered
The Supreme Court struck a sympathetic note for in-service doctors on Monday, indicating it favours a lower NEET-SS percentile threshold for government doctors seeking admission to super-speciality medical programmes. The bench pointedly observed that such doctors cannot be expected to "sit at home and study" — acknowledging the fundamental difference between a working physician juggling clinical duties and a fresh postgraduate preparing full-time for a competitive exam.
The remarks come in the context of a long-running dispute over whether in-service candidates — typically doctors employed by state governments in public hospitals — should be measured against the same percentile cut-offs as open-category candidates. State governments have consistently argued that uniform standards disadvantage their public health workforce and make it harder to retain trained doctors in government service.
The practical stakes are considerable. Super-speciality seats in disciplines such as cardiology, neurology, and oncology are intensely competitive, and in-service doctors who fail to clear the standard percentile cut-off are effectively barred from specialist advancement despite years of clinical experience. A lower cut-off, critics of the current system argue, is not a dilution of merit but a recognition of a structurally different context.
The court's observations, while not yet a final order, are likely to strengthen the hand of those petitioning for the change. The National Medical Commission and the central government will be expected to respond formally before the bench issues its final directions.