Since its inception in 2013, the NEET has been marred by controversies. What was envisioned as a transparent and uniform entrance exam has instead become synonymous with administrative lapses. Is the answer then to decentralise the exam?

G.R. Ravindranath: NEET has reduced the burden of multiple medical entrance exams and lowered students’ financial, mental and physical stress. Unlike Plus Two cut-off admissions, NEET offers multiple attempts, giving students another chance to improve. However, rural, poor and government school students remain disadvantaged due to unequal access to coaching and resources. Measures such as special reservations, fee support scholarships, additional marks, and free coaching classes for government school students can ensure equitable opportunities. Tamil Nadu’s 7.5% reservation for government school students can serve as a model for nationwide reforms to make NEET fairer and more inclusive. States should be allowed to conduct their own entrance exams and admit students in order to ensure that students from vulnerable socio-economic sections are not put at a disadvantage.

Balaji Sampath: Single window exams such as NEET have only increased the pressure on students because it affords them only a single chance — one time a year to get into various medical courses across India.

Moreover, NEET is both an entrance and eligibility test. Entrance for government seats and eligibility for management seats in private medical colleges. When the Supreme Court made NEET compulsory, the private college lobby pushed for keeping the qualifying marks really low (at 50th percentile which is around 120 to 140 marks out of 720). So a student who scores 130, qualifies NEET and is eligible to buy a management seat. However, poor and middle class students who score 400 are unable to pay and get these management seats. Given that there are only 1.37 lakhs seats and 22 lakhs students writing NEET, the cut-off should be kept much higher. This will ensure that rich students who score 130-350 do not pay and steal the seats of those who get much higher scores.

Why is the NEET exam marred by repeated allegations about paper leaks?

Balaji Sampath: To understand the vulnerability of the exam, we have to understand the scale that the paper targets. This pen-and-paper exam has 22 lakh students who compete for less than two lakh seats across all medical courses. The problem originates here and gets accentuated by dropper students who have money power; they are people who are ready to pay ₹30 lakh to get a guess paper. One has to understand that this corruption is driven by money power and desperation. In its current form, NEET has become an intensely high-stakes exam. Over half the candidates are repeaters, some attempting it for years, deepening desperation and fuelling paper leaks and corruption. Limiting attempts, while offering extra chances and reservations for disadvantaged students, could reduce pressure and improve fairness. A two-stage examination system, as recommended by the K. Radhakrishnan Committee — set up by the Central government after allegations of corruption in the NEET 2024 paper — could reduce incentives for cheating by filtering candidates through a preliminary qualifier before a more tightly monitored final exam.

G.R. Ravindranath: The lack of effective regulation over private medical colleges and the fees of deemed medical universities has significantly deepened inequities in admissions. Under the National Medical Commission Act, fee regulation applies only to 50% of seats, while private colleges are free to fix exorbitant fees for the remaining seats, making medical education inaccessible to many deserving students. Although anti-capitation laws exist, enforcement remains weak and requires urgent strengthening. The mop-up counselling and stray counselling conducted by private colleges and deemed universities pave the way for malpractice and eliminates merit based admissions. State government-controlled and Union government-controlled seats should be filled by the respective government authorities. Private institutions should not be allowed to admit students directly.

Also, medical admissions cannot be compared with engineering admissions, where vacancies remain high due to unemployment and declining demand. The pressure surrounding medical education is shaped by strong socio-economic and cultural factors, making NEET a far more high-stakes exam.

States should be granted greater autonomy in admissions through amendments to the National Medical Commission Act. States willing to opt out of NEET should be allowed to adopt systems based on Plus Two marks, State-level entrance tests, or a combination of both. Further reforms are necessary to reduce excessive competition. These include limiting the number of NEET attempts, introducing age limits, and fixing minimum eligibility marks at 60% in science subjects in Class 12th examinations for open quota and OBC students, and 50% for SC/ST students applying for NEET.

At the same time, NEET should continue for all-India quota seats, AIIMS, JIPMER, deemed universities, and management quota seats of private medical colleges. For these seats, admissions cannot be made on the basis of Plus Two marks or any State government exam because, for these seats, students from all over the country, as well as NRIs, overseas citizens of India and foreign nationals can also apply.

After the 2024 NEET paper leak controversy, the K. Radhakrishnan Committee identified major security lapses, including poor CCTV monitoring and excessive reliance on contractual staff within the NTA. Why has the government not fully implemented the Committee’s recommendations?

Balaji Sampath: The NTA did not implement most of the important recommendations of the Radhakrishnan committee. The Committee’s recommendations can be categorised into three types: improving NTA’s capacity, strengthening security measures such as CCTV surveillance and safer paper transport, and most importantly, reducing the high-stakes nature of NEET itself. The third category is particularly important, but nothing was done about it. The most important recommendation was to conduct NEET in two stages. The first stage, the prelims, can select five lakh students out of the 22 lakhs and these five lakh students can then write the main NEET exam which will be used for medical college admission. This will dramatically reduce paper leaks. The second major recommendation was to limit the number of attempts. This will reduce the number of repeaters who in their desperation are often ready to pay large amounts for leaked papers. To ensure equity, two more attempts can be allowed for SC/ST and BPL (Below Poverty Line) students. The NTA did not implement any of these recommendations.

G.R. Ravindranath: Among the several suggestions of the Committee, one of the most important was a computer based test which was never implemented. Also, that coaching centres across India should be registered, regulated and that fees should be fixed. Our association opposed demands to abolish NEET entirely, arguing that doing so would revive multiple entrance exams.

With lakhs of students now forced to retake NEET, many families have been pushed into severe emotional and financial distress. Both of you have been directly in touch with the aggrieved side, how do they view these repeated large-scale disruptions?

G.R. Ravindranath: Although the authorities have now announced a NEET re-examination on June 21, the initial cancellation created enormous uncertainty and emotional distress among students.

It has created widespread anger, disappointment and a growing loss of confidence in the impartiality and credibility of national competitive examinations, leaving students feeling uncertain about their future. The Union government and the NTA should take the responsibility for the question paper leakage. In future such things should not recur.

Listen to the conversation