SC Orders Major Overhaul Of NEET-PG Counselling To Curb Seat Blocking, Ensure Transparent Medical Admissions – News18

Last Updated:May 22, 2025, 15:29 IST

In a major move to curb malpractice in PG medical admissions, the Supreme Court has issued sweeping directives to reform the NEET-PG counselling process.

The Supreme Court has issued a series of directives aimed at reforming the NEET-PG (National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test – Post Graduate) counselling process to curb the widespread practice of seat-blocking in postgraduate medical admissions. The Court has further mandated that all medical colleges disclose pre-counselling fees in advance, thereby promoting transparency and fairness in the admission process.

The bench, comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan, was hearing a case concerning large-scale manipulation of seats during the NEET-PG counselling process.

The Court issued the following key directives:

Unified Counselling Calendar: Introduce a nationally coordinated counselling schedule to synchronise All India Quota (AIQ) and State counselling rounds, thereby preventing seat blocking across systems.

Mandatory Pre-Counselling Fee Disclosure: All private and deemed universities must disclose complete fee details—including tuition, hostel, caution deposit, and other charges—before counselling begins.

Central Fee Regulation System: Establish a uniform fee regulation framework under the National Medical Commission (NMC) to standardise charges across institutions.

Post-Round 2 Upgrade Provision: Allow candidates already admitted in Round 2 to upgrade to better seats in subsequent rounds, without reopening counselling to new applicants.

Transparency in NEET-PG Exams: Ensure the publication of raw scores, official answer keys, and the normalization formula used in multi-shift NEET-PG examinations.

Strict Penalties for Seat Blocking: Impose strong actions such as forfeiting the security deposit, disqualifying repeat offenders from future NEET-PG exams, and blacklisting institutions found enabling seat blocking.

Aadhaar-Based Seat Tracking: Implement Aadhaar-linked tracking to prevent candidates from holding multiple seats or submitting false information.

Accountability of Authorities: Make state counselling bodies and Directors of Medical Education (DMEs) liable for disciplinary or contempt proceedings in case of schedule breaches or rule violations.

Uniform Counselling Code: Introduce a standardised code of conduct for counselling across all states, with consistent rules on eligibility, mop-up rounds, seat withdrawal, and grievance redressal timelines.

Independent Oversight by NMC: Set up a third-party oversight mechanism under the NMC to conduct annual audits on counselling processes, data compliance, and fairness in admissions.

ALSO READ: This Woman Officer Lost Hand In Accident But Didn’t Lose Determination To Crack IAS Exam. Who Is She?

The judgment follows a petition filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Director General of Medical Education & Training, challenging a 2018 Allahabad High Court order that had penalised officials for irregularities in that year’s counselling process.

The High Court had found that candidates with lower merit were allowed to participate in the mop-up counselling rounds despite having already been allotted seats, thereby disadvantaging higher-ranked aspirants.

Consequently, the High Court awarded Rs 10 lakh in compensation to each petitioner and directed structural reforms. However, the Supreme Court stayed this order in 2018 and has now reduced the compensation to Rs 1 lakh per petitioner, citing subsequent policy improvements.

The Court noted reforms introduced post-2021, particularly in the Nihila P.P. v. Medical Counselling Committee case, where a four-round counselling scheme was implemented for All India Quota (AIQ) seats. Nonetheless, the bench emphasised that these measures must now be effectively enforced through centralised regulation and transparent procedures.

What Is Seat Blocking?

Seat blocking occurs when candidates temporarily accept medical counselling seats but later relinquish them after obtaining preferable options in subsequent rounds. This tactic creates a false shortage of available seats, deceives other aspirants, and undermines the merit-based selection process. The Supreme Court characterised seat blocking as indicative of deeper systemic problems, such as inadequate coordination, lack of transparency, and fragmented oversight.

First Published: