The courtroom was quiet when the bench finally wrapped up a dispute that has been hanging over hundreds of dental graduates for nearly a decade. On Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled that Rajasthan had no authority to dilute NEET eligibility norms for BDS admissions in 2016, calling the entire exercise legally flawed. The verdict has brought long-awaited clarity, but also discomfort, especially for students who believed their admissions were secure.
Background
The case arose from Rajasthan’s decision in 2016 to lower the minimum NEET percentile for admission to Bachelor of Dental Surgery courses. Faced with a large number of vacant seats, the State first reduced the cut-off by 10 percentile and then, citing “special exigency,” allowed an additional 5 percentile relaxation. Private dental colleges acted on this and admitted students who otherwise did not qualify under NEET norms.
Read also:- Supreme Court fixes scientific definition of Aravali Hills, halts fresh mining leases across Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan and Gujarat pending expert clearance
Problems began when the Dental Council of India objected, saying only the Central Government could lower NEET cut-offs, and that too in consultation with the Council. The Rajasthan High Court later stepped in. While a Single Judge protected admissions up to the 10+5 percentile relaxation, students admitted beyond that were ordered to be discharged. The Division Bench largely agreed and even imposed heavy costs on colleges.
Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court was blunt in its assessment. It noted that NEET is not just an entrance exam but a national mechanism to maintain uniform standards in medical and dental education. “The power to lower the minimum qualifying percentile lies exclusively with the Central Government,” the bench observed, adding that such power “cannot be assumed or exercised by a State on its own.”
Read also:- Supreme Court Overturns Telangana High Court Orders, Says Expired Driving Licences Break Eligibility for Police Driver Recruitment Posts
Rejecting Rajasthan’s defence, the Court said the phrase “necessary action as deemed fit” used by the Centre in its 2016 communication could not be stretched into a delegation of statutory power. The judges made it clear that there was no provision under the Dentists Act or the 2007 Regulations allowing such delegation. Acting on this mistaken assumption, the State had reduced the cut-off not once, but twice.
The bench was also critical of private colleges that went even further, admitting students with zero or negative NEET scores. Such actions, the Court said, were driven by the urge to fill seats and risked producing “sub-standard dentists,” something the regulatory framework was meant to prevent.
Read also:- Supreme Court quashes ESI demand against Carborandum Universal, says Section 45A can’t replace proper adjudication when records are
Decision
Allowing the appeals in part, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s reasoning that treated Rajasthan’s 10+5 percentile relaxation as lawful. It held that all reductions made by the State were illegal from the outset, as the authority to do so never vested in it. Admissions granted on the basis of these State-led relaxations, therefore, could not be sustained in law. The Court reaffirmed that NEET standards cannot be diluted by States and must be uniformly enforced to protect merit and public health.
Case Title: Siddhant Mahajan and Others vs State of Rajasthan and Others
Case No.: Civil Appeal Nos. ……… of 2025 (arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 14014–14019 of 2023 and connected matters)
Case Type: Civil Appeal (BDS/NEET Admission Dispute)
Decision Date: 2025
