Altering the merit-list approach for NEET-PG and NEET-SS without resolving core structural issues proves to be insufficient. (Pic Credit: Magnific.com)

NEW DELHI: Changing NEET-PG and NEET-SS from a percentile-based to a rank-based system will not address the structural problems in medical education, doctors’ body said, flagging exorbitant fees, compulsory bonds, inadequate stipends and vacancies in less preferred specialities as the issues requiring urgent attention.“These were the key concerns raised by stakeholders at the October 9 DGHS meeting. Changing the merit-list methodology without addressing these issues is merely changing the approach, not reforming medical education,” United Doctors Front (UDF) chairperson Dr Lakshya Mittal who was part of the meeting said.The govt’s response to earlier stakeholder recommendations on these issues, reproduced in an expert committee report submitted to supreme court on Tuesday, points largely to state jurisdiction and existing regulations. On fee regulation, the govt cited NMC guidelines issued in February 2022 for determining charges for 50% of seats in private medical colleges and deemed universities, but said the guidelines were under litigation. Fee structures, it said, were governed by state regulatory authorities.On bonds, the govt said the policy fell under state jurisdiction. It also said stipends in National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences institutions were at par with those for MD/MS/DM/MCh seats in state institutions. Public-sector recruitment and job placements, it added, were also under state jurisdiction. These responses relate to earlier stakeholder recommendations and are not a direct reply to the October 9 meeting.At the meeting, Mittal had called for uniform fee regulation, bond-free admissions in pre-clinical and para-clinical branches, where seats often remain vacant, and equitable stipends. He also sought better faculty recruitment, career progression and research opportunities to address vacancies without resorting to zero or negative qualifying cut-offs.Other particpants in the meeting, Dr Raj Shekhar and Dr Ankit also flagged high fees, particularly in deemed universities, and sought fee regulatory committees to ensure reasonable charges. Participants called for uniform stipends across clinical and non-clinical branches and incentives for rural postings.

Dr Nikhil questioned the basis for reducing qualifying percentiles in PG and super-speciality courses, including who took the decision and whether reductions should be restricted to the final counselling round. He also proposed independent audits of medical education costs.Participants cautioned against diluting qualifying standards merely to fill vacant seats. Dr G Raghavelu said measures to prevent seat wastage must protect professional standards. Biometric and KYC checks to prevent seat blocking were also suggested.The draft minutes record that qualifying marks could be reduced without compromising education quality, fees regulated uniformly through committees and stipends made more attractive. Separately, Supreme Court committee report records the NMC’s in-principle approval for a rank-based system for NEET-PG and NEET-SS, without declaring percentile marks. The proposal is yet to be formalised through regulations.