NEET-SS | 'Cut-Off For In-Service Candidates Should Be Lesser': Supreme Court Urges Reduction In Percentile For Govt Doctors

The Supreme Court today issued notice on a plea seeking to restrain the Tamil Nadu government from surrendering 152 vacant in-service Super Speciality medical seats (2025-26) earmarked for in-service government doctors to the All India Quota. 

A partial Court working days bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Joymalya Bagchi called for the response of the authorities, while orally observing that cut-off for in-service candidates serving under the State should be lesser as they are serving in the public health sector and studying alongside.

Notably, Justice Nagarathna remarked during the hearing that, "a govt doctor, if acquires more skills, will serve public health better than private doctor". "How many can afford private hospital?" the judge questioned.

It may be recalled that a co-ordinate bench of the Court, headed by Justice PS Narasimha, recently, in Tamilveni case, directed the State of Tamil Nadu to intimate the Director General of Health Services about 151 vacant super speciality medical seats that remained unfilled so that they could be filled through the All India merit list.

The order was passed in a writ petition seeking surrender of unfilled DM and M.Ch seats from the Tamil Nadu State Quota to the All India Quota in the ongoing NEET-SS 2025 counselling process.

Following this order, the present petition was filed by the Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association (and another) seeking to restrain the State from surrendering 152 vacant SS seats in colleges within the State to the All India Quota. The petitioners further prayed that in-service candidates in Tamil Nadu be permitted to compete for the said 152 seats in the 3rd round or a mop-up round if percentile is reduced below 50% after the 2nd round of all-India counselling.

During today's hearing, Senior Advocate P Wilson (for petitioners) informed the Court that the percentile has been reduced for Post-Graduate seats, but 2nd round of counselling for super-speciality seats has not been done in view of the aforementioned order passed in Tamilveni's case (where the Association of in-service officers was not represented).

He contended that permitting the 152 SS seats to be filled through All India Quota before completion of the 2nd round of counselling and before a final decision is taken qua reduction of the qualifying percentile would seriously prejudice in-service government doctors and adversely impact public health infrastructure of Tamil Nadu.

In response, Justice Nagarathna said, "All India Quota...that is not in-service candidates...Percentage has to be reduced because they are working...Other persons who are sitting at home take this...otherwise no government doctors [can take this]...they have to reduce the percentile...".

Subsequently, Wilson told the bench that after having given consent in Tamilveni's case, the Tamil Nadu government has filed a review petition against the order passed by Justice Narasimha's bench. He also underlined that in previous academic years, qualifying percentile for NEET-SS was consistently reduced during later stages of counselling and therefore surrender of seats to All India Quota at this point can be seriously prejudicial.

Questioning the non-reduction in percentile this year, and highlighting that in-service doctors lose out on merit as they are serving while studying, Justice Nagarathna remarked,

"In every State, there are in-service candidates. They are government doctors. They are there for public health. Cut-off for them must be lesser. Reason being, they are serving and studying. On the other hand there are students, when it comes to PG Diploma and...they are sitting at home and studying. They are not serving. In-service is a different channel. If you just give it up, how will State doctors benefit? It is for people of the State...public health. They are all working in State government hospitals. You just enable them to achieve greater skills...super-speciality. There must be, according to me, a lesser cutoff for them because they are working and studying. If All India [quota] takes away, how does it help the State doctors?"

Advocate Mithu Jain (for NMC), per contra, contended that the reversion of seats to the All India Quota flows from the Supreme Court's order in N Karthikeyan's case, which case is sub-judice. In response to her contention that the subject provision (in-service reservation) is unique to Tamil Nadu, Justice Nagarathna responded, "because it's State of Tamil Nadu, it can't be different...".

"A person who has asked for conversion [of seats] does not make the in-service candidate association a party and an ex parte order is taken from this court. They were not heard in the matter. What about their right to get the percentile reduced and there be a further round of counselling?", the judge added.

Justice Nagarathna further clarified that the bench was not modifying the co-ordinate bench's direction.

"We are concerned with public health - whichever State it may be. In-service is a separate category of admission. You want 152 seats but you don't admit. They can't sit at home and study. Their merit comes down because they serve and study. If the Director General will reduce, it will benefit all in-service candidates all over the country. Not just Tamil Nadu", the judge stressed.

Insofar as a status quo direction was sought with regard to 2nd round of SS counselling (All India Quota), which has been kept on hold, the bench declined to record anything in the order.

To the NMC counsel, Justice Nagarathna said, "You follow that precedent where you reduced the percentile. Have a counselling for them. Remaining seats will be converted".

The matter is next listed for consideration on July 15.

Case Title: TAMIL NADU MEDICAL OFFICERS ASSOCIATION AND ANR. Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., WP(C) No. 771 / 2026