New Delhi, May 30 (UNI) In a significant ruling to uphold fairness and transparency in competitive medical examinations, the Supreme Court on Friday directed the National Board of Examinations (NBE) to conduct NEET-PG 2025 in a single shift instead of the previously planned two-shift format.
A Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Kumar, and NV Anjaria said the two-shift model was arbitrary and inherently unfair, as question papers in separate shifts can never be of exactly the same difficulty level, despite claims of “normalisation”.
“Holding examinations in two shifts creates arbitrariness and does not place all candidates on the same level. No two question papers can be identical in difficulty or ease,” the Court stated firmly.
The Court rejected the NBE’s argument that logistical limitations, such as the lack of enough centres with online exam infrastructure, necessitated two shifts.
“This is a national exam, not a local one. Given India’s technological advancement, we are not ready to accept that sufficient centres cannot be identified across the country,” the Bench asserted.
When the NBE claimed that only a few students had challenged the two-shift format, Justice Sanjay Kumar countered, “Even if one student has a legitimate grievance, the Court will intervene.”
The Court was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the two-shift NEET-PG 2025 model, with petitioners arguing it violated Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 21 (Right to Fair Procedure) of the Constitution.
Senior Advocate Maninder Acharya, appearing for the NBE, claimed that the two-shift exam format was necessary due to infrastructure constraints and online exam requirements. She added that several national-level exams like CAT, INI-CET, JEE, and CUET are also held in multiple shifts with normalisation.
However, the Bench dismissed these comparisons, asserting:
“You cannot compare NEET-PG with other exams. This is a post-graduate medical entrance exam. There has to be zero arbitrariness.”
Addressing NBE’s defence of using “normalisation” to balance shift difficulties, the Court clarified:
“Normalisation may be applied in exceptional cases, but it cannot become the default every year.”
The Court emphasised that the principle of “merit over luck” must govern competitive exams, and normalisation cannot be used as a blanket justification.
“Why should there be normalisation? Two-shift candidates face different levels of difficulty. That’s unfair,” Justice Vikram Nath remarked.
NEET-PG 2025 is scheduled for June 15, and the Court noted that over two weeks remain to arrange for single-shift logistics.
However, it gave the NBE the option to seek an extension if more time is required.
“If the respondents find that they are not able to identify the centres and conduct the examination on 15th June, it will be open to them to apply for extension of time,” the Court clarified.
The petitions filed by students and advocates, including Senior Advocate Shikhil Suri and lawyers Vidhisha Swarup, Dr. Charu Mathur, Avani Bansal, among others argued that the two-shift format leads to inconsistencies in question paper difficulty, giving some candidates an unfair edge.
They cited issues with NEET-PG 2024, which was conducted in two shifts and faced criticism and litigation for uneven question distributions. An analysis by a coaching platform showed variation in subject-wise questions, further raising concerns about fairness and transparency.
The petitioners called the practice a violation of Articles 14 and 21, stressing that conducting the exam in a single shift would ensure a “just, fair, reasonable, and equitable” competition.
