The anticipation surrounding the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test for Postgraduate (NEET-PG) 2025 has been overshadowed by controversy following the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) announcement that the exam will be conducted in two shifts on June 15, 2025. The medical community's growing discontent stems from issues reported during previous NEET-PG iterations, especially the last exam held on August 11, 2024, when candidates who sat for the second shift contended that their question paper was significantly more difficult than that of the first shift.
Students and medical aspirants are left fuming. Many felt their chances of fairness in selection were compromised, prompting accusations of 'scamming' by the NBEMS and a Supreme Court petition demanding greater examination transparency. In light of these concerns, the National Medicos Organisation (NMO), which represents medical professionals and aspiring students, has taken a stand by formally appealing to the Union Ministry of Health.
In a letter dated March 23, NMO's Akhil Bhartiya Vidyarthi Pramukh, Dr Anshita Mishra, expressed significant apprehensions: "Conducting the exam in multiple shifts raises serious concerns about the integrity of the selection process... Variations in question paper difficulty across shifts make it challenging to ensure a truly fair normalization system." The NMO urged authorities to reconsider their decision, emphasizing that a single-shift examination could help regain trust in the process and ensure a merit-based selection system.
The discontent is further fueled by delays in NEET PG 2024 admissions. These delays stem from various legal proceedings and ongoing petitions that have continuously pushed back the expected timeline for new batches to join postgraduate courses. The NEET PG 2024 was originally scheduled for June 23, 2024, but was postponed to August 11 and, following that, results have delayed admissions even further.
As Dr BN Gangadhar, chairperson of the National Medical Commission (NMC) explained, the delays are compounded by an increase in both the number of aspirants for PG courses and the complexity of the legal landscape surrounding admissions. "The number of aspirants for PG courses has increased in the past decade. New seats are being added because more candidates are applying. At some point, we will have the same number of PG seats as there are students passing out," he stated. In short, the increased competition has created a bottleneck, especially when backed by candidates who back out of accepted seats and enter legal disputes, which in turn prolongs the admission process.
Adding to the pressure, medical institutions are grappling with heightened demands placed upon the current residents. Hospitals report that the absence of new medical graduates to fill positions increases the workload and stress levels for existing residents. "The delayed arrival of new medical graduates could increase the workload for existing residents, resulting in longer hours and greater stress," noted B Unnikrishnan, the dean of Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, emphasizing the urgency to resolve ongoing legal uncertainties affecting counseling processes.
In the wake of increasing concerns voiced by aspirants regarding transparency in assessments, calls for the release of the exam's answer key, raw scores, and details of the normalization process have surfaced. Despite these requests, NBEMS has cited confidentiality as a reason for withholding this information. The NEET PG 2025 is poised to apply a normalization method similar to previous years, and while it aims to provide a fair assessment context, many remain unconvinced, particularly following the last exam’s disputes.
The Federation Of All India Medical Association (FAIMA) has also articulated its discontent in a letter to the NBEMS. They assert that having different question papers across shifts invariably leads to discrepancies in difficulty levels. Dr Gangadhar, while addressing these concerns, has tried to reassure candidates, stating that normalization practices are widely accepted in various examinations. He highlighted, "Many other exams have been using normalization to arrive at all-India ranks. Smaller batches are easier to monitor and supervise. It is a time-tested method as it is easier to manage two batches. Authorities conducting the exam are experts; there is no need to have concerns about the process.”
Yet, doubts linger among candidates, with many fearing that the paper for those taking the afternoon session may have been easier, raising their anxiety about losing potential seats. Dr Akshay Dongardive, national vice president of FAIMA, pointed out that such fears could be alleviated by conducting the exam in a single session. He proposed: "If the exam is conducted in two sessions, the final answer key and raw scores must be released before exam results are announced," enhancing the transparency of the examination process.
The response from students and medical associations indicates an urgent call for reform. Opponents of the current two-shift format argue that this structure does not uphold the values of merit and fairness that are supposed to characterize entrance exams for professional courses, particularly in the competitive medical field.
As the June 15 exam date approaches, the pressure mounts on the NBEMS to address these concerns adequately. The current plan remains a contentious issue and now more than ever, a decisive approach is necessary to assuage the anxiety of aspiring medical professionals across the nation.
