The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) has revised the qualifying percentiles for NEET-PG 2025 admissions, reducing it to zero percentile from 40 percentile for reserved category.This will enable even those who have scored minus 40 marks out of 800 in the NEET-PG 2025 to participate in the ongoing third round of counselling for postgraduate medical admissions.The qualifying percentile for the general category has been decreased from 50 percentile to 7 percentile and for disabled individuals, it has been reduced from 45 to the 5 percentile. This means that anyone scoring 103 out of 800 in the general category and any disabled category candidate with a score of 90 can participate in the counselling.Officials said that 18,000 of 70,000 PG seats are vacant and the relaxation would expedite the process of filling of seats.The Indian Medical Association (IMA) had requested the Health Ministry to revise the qualifying percentile as the move would reduce the workload on resident doctors and strengthen teaching hospitals.However, even before this, the Health Ministry on January 9 wrote to the NBEMS and Medical Counselling Committee that the qualifying percentile has been reduced for the third round of counselling.Last year, despite a reduction in qualifying percentile, over 4,000 seats remained vacant.But this has sparked concern among medical professionals. “Merit shouldn’t have negative value. NEET PG cut-off at -40 isn’t a relief, it’s dilution. Seat filling ≠ standards. A negative cut-off makes ‘qualifying’ meaningless,” Dr Sumer Sethi, a radiologist posted on X.Dr Rohan Krishnan, Chief Patron of the Federation of All-India Medical Association (FAIMA), said, “When qualifying cut-offs are dropped to 7, 5 & even 0 percentile, what is the purpose of a national merit exam? This is not reform — this is surrender of standards! Instead of diluting merit just to fill seats, authorities must conduct an additional exam if required and reduce the unnaturally inflated PG seats in sub-standard private colleges which lack faculty, patient load and basic infrastructure.”