NEET-PG | Not All MBBS Grads Qualified To Become Specialists, Will Introduce 'Exit Test' Like AIBE To Regulate Doctors' Practice: Centre To Delhi HC

Update on March 29 - NEET-PG: Delhi High Court Expresses Disinclination To Interfere With Cut-Off Percentile

The Central Government on Monday claimed before the Delhi High Court that to generalize and say that everybody who has qualified MBBS is on "flat ground" and should be eligible to pursue post-graduate education, is not right.

It highlighted that NEET-PG is an exam, aimed to neutralize various factors such as the quality of education imparted during the under-graduate medical course, the difficulty level of exams, etc. and filter out such candidates who are meritorious enough to be called "specialists".

In this vein, the Centre also told the Court that to enhance the quality of medical and healthcare in the country, it is planning to introduce an 'Exit Test' (just like AIBE for lawyers), which will be a qualifier to be registered as a Doctor. The merit list of this test will be taken into account for admissions to PG courses.

"This may be the last year that NEET-PG takes place. We will come out with the 'National Exit Test'. Just like AIBE is for lawyers, an exit test will be developed for doctors. All doctors, while passing out MBBS will have to qualify this exam after which they'll be registered as Practitioners. Same merit will be taken for admission to PG courses," T Singh Dev appearing for the Centre submitted.

However, he clarified that the proposal is still under consideration and the functionality of the exam is not yet final. When asked if there will be a cut-off system in that exam, he answered in the affirmative.

The development ensued in a petition filed by three MBBS graduates, seeking relaxation in the cut-off percentile prescribed this year by the Medical Council of India for admissions to medical colleges through NEET-PG.

The hearing is being conducted before a Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Navin Chawla.

Earlier, the Court had expressed its reservations on the 'percentile' system adopted for counselling. It had said that under the current regime, there is scope of many meritorious candidates being left out merely because they do not fit in the percentile cut-off while the seats in medical colleges go vacant. It had suggested that the examination authority should instead apply the 'percentage' system.

The petitioners, represented by Advocate Varun Singh had also argued that by leaving out meritorious candidates merely on the ground that they do not qualify in the 50 percentile, the authority is violating their fundamental rights.

NEET-PG Percentile | Meritorious Students Have Fundamental Right To Pursue Post Graduate Education: MBBS Grads Argue In Delhi High Court

Responding to this, Singh Dev today submitted that contrary to what the petitioner had argued, the percentile system was introduced to in fact increase the number of candidates filling the PG seats.

He demonstrated the following statistics from the previous academic year:

The total number of seats were: 38,107

The minimum qualifying criteria was 50 percentile (for general category). The last (general category) candidate who got a seat at the 50 percentile cut-off had scored 366/1200 marks, corresponding to 30.5%

Thereafter, the there was a reduction in percentile by 20 percentile, following which, the last (general category) candidate who got a seat had scored 275/1200 marks, corresponding to 22.91%, whereas the lowest marks at which admission was granted in reserved category was 19.16%.

Total unfilled seats in the previous academic year were 1,425.

Singh Dev submitted that 13,000 additional candidates got seats after reduction in percentile. However, if absolute merit (percentage formula) were to be applied, there would be far less admissions as the minimum marks required for admission would be 400.

Hearing this, the Bench inquired from the government that when admission into MBBS is not easy, it is given that those who qualify MBBS are meritorious. In such circumstances it is not countenanced why their performances drop so drastically at the end of MBBS.

It is at this juncture that Singh Dev apprised the Bench regarding the disparity of quality in education at different institutions and discussed the plausibility of an 'Exit Test'.

Thereafter, the petitioner's counsel sought to know the rationale behind not keeping a uniform cut-off percentile every year. However, the Bench remarked,

"They have all the data. They set 50 percentile, then see how many seats are left. Then they drop the percentile to fill more and more...Once the merit drops drastically from the reference point of percentage, they take a call, they're the experts, they can do that."

Singh Dev also informed the Court that so far as the case of Petitioners are concerned, they fall much below the cut-off and have scored very low. He informed,

Petitioner 1 scored 136/800 marks, i.e., 17%;

Petitioner 2 scored 115/800marks, i.e., 14.37%;

Petitioner 3 scored 45/800 marks, i.e., 5.62%.

He argued that while selecting persons for making "Specialists", the authorities need to have a higher degree of consideration of quality of people. "No person has a vested right to become specialist when unable to meet particular cut-off marks," he added.

The hearing will continue tomorrow.

The mop-up counselling round is set to wind up on March 30, which will be followed by a stray vacancy round.

The percentile for admissions to NEET-PG 2021 was reduced by 15 percentile across all categories by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences last week. However, the petitioners approached the Court stating that despite such lowering of percentile each year, as many as 5,000 seats remain vacant.

Case Title: DR. ABHINAV KUMAR & ORS. v. Union of India