NEET-PG 2025 | PIL In Allahabad High Court Against Allowing Counselling For SC/ST/OBC Candidates With 'Minus 40' Marks
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea has been filed in the Allahabad High Court challenging the decision of the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) to allow the counselling of SC/ST/OBC students who scored -40 (Minus 40) out of 800 marks in the NEET-PG 2025 exams.The Petitioner, Advocate Abhinav Gaur, terms the move ultra vires to Article 16(4) of the Constitution...
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea has been filed in the Allahabad High Court challenging the decision of the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) to allow the counselling of SC/ST/OBC students who scored -40 (Minus 40) out of 800 marks in the NEET-PG 2025 exams.
The Petitioner, Advocate Abhinav Gaur, terms the move ultra vires to Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India. The plea challenges the decision on the grounds that a substantial reduction in the Cut-off marks for NEET-PG 2025 will undermine the sanctity of a merit-based selection process.
The plea highlights that when the NEET-PG 2025 results were declared on August 19, 2025, the qualifying percentiles were as per the original NEET-PG 2025 Information Bulletin
50th percentile for General/EWS,
45th percentile for General-PwBD, and
40th percentile for SC/ST/OBC (including PwBD in those categories).
However, the plea adds, after more than 18,000 seats remained vacant following the second round of counselling, the Board drastically reduced the qualifying criteria, setting the score at -40/800 for the SC/ST/OBC category.
The petition also points out that in the General (EWS) category, the cut-off has been reduced from 276 to 103, whereas in the General-PwBD category, it has been reduced from 255 to 90.
However, in the SC/ST/OBC category, the same was reduced from 235 to -40 marks, which, the PIL plea argues, will adversely impact public health and patient safety, which are matters of paramount public concern and involve a high level of academic precision, as pleaded by the petitioner.
It has been further pleaded that such a quality of doctors who do not have the minimum threshold to qualify for the examination would affect the right to health and life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Advocates Vibhu Rai, Ankit Shukla and Achlesh Mishra appear for the petitioner.