— ✍️ Nethrapal

The narrative surrounding "negative cutoffs" in PG NEET has frequently been used to malign the hard work of SC, ST, and OBC students. However, a deeper look at the Round 1 data and the structural realities of medical education reveals that this rhetoric is a calculated farce.

Here are ten reasons why the negative cutoff narrative is a myth:

1. Cutoffs Reflect Least-Demanded Courses, Not Merit: The "cutoff" is simply the rank of the last person admitted to the system. In PG Medical, this often refers to non-clinical courses like Anatomy, Physiology, and Biochemistry, which have extremely low demand. Comparing these to high-demand clinical branches like Radiology or General Medicine is intellectually dishonest.

2. Filling 18,000 Vacant Seats: After Round 2 of the 2025-26 counseling, over 18,000 PG seats remained unfilled across India. To prevent the waste of national medical resources, cutoffs are lowered to expand the pool of eligible candidates for these vacant seats, primarily in non-clinical branches.

3. Protection of Private College Interests: Private medical colleges, having made massive investments, cannot afford to let seats go empty. Lowering the cutoff creates a larger pool of potential "customers." These institutions benefit from a low bar that allows them to target students who can afford exorbitant fees, regardless of their rank.

4. The "Fees Over Merit" Reality: A top-ranking SC, ST, or OBC student may have the merit but lacks the financial power to pay fees exceeding ₹1 crore. By lowering cutoffs, private colleges can bypass merit to admit students who have the "buying power" to fill seats that meritorious but less-wealthy students cannot afford.

5. Reserved Candidates are Bagging Open Seats: Data from top institutes like Madras Medical College proves the merit of reserved candidates. For General Medicine, OBC candidates secured Open Category seats at Ranks 9, 67, 125, and 291. They are not just qualifying; they are displacing general candidates in the open competition.

6. Minimal Mark Difference in Clinical Branches: In highly demanded subjects like MD Radiology at Madras Medical College, the difference between the OBC seat (Rank 182) and the General seat (Rank 156) is negligible. The gap in actual marks is estimated to be as low as 4 to 5 marks, proving that there is no "merit crisis" in top courses.

7. Non-Clinical Vacancy is a Universal Issue: In the top 100 ranks, not a single student—General or Reserved—opts for Anatomy or Biochemistry. These seats go vacant across all categories. Lowering the cutoff is a systemic response to fill these unwanted branches, not a "favor" to reserved categories.

8. Negligible Percentage Gap: The actual difference in qualifying marks is tiny. With the General PwBD cutoff at 31.87% and the Reserved cutoff at 29.37%, the gap is less than 2.5%. Labeling one "meritorious" and the other "non-meritorious" over a 2% difference is statistically absurd.

9. Lack of Granular Data: By publishing only the "last cutoff" rather than course-wise and college-wise data, the public is misled. If NEET published separate cutoffs for Radiology and Biochemistry, it would be clear that reserved candidates in clinical branches have exceptionally high scores.

10. The AIIMS and IIT Precedent History shows that in premier institutes like AIIMS, the difference in marks between General and OBC candidates has been as low as 0.4%. Hardworking SC, ST, and OBC students have consistently proven that when the playing field is the top tier, the "merit gap" virtually disappears.

- The author has over 16 years of experience in the Indian Revenue Service (IRS), and is a seasoned tax enforcement leader who is passionate about ensuring compliance and fairness in the tax system. He has a strong academic background with a B-Tech from IIT-Madras in Electrical Engineering, where he received a Silver Medal, and a PGDM from IIM-Bangalore, where he specialized in Finance and Economics.