Jabalpur: The Madhya Pradesh High Court (MP HC) provided significant relief to postgraduate medical aspirants by quashing the state merit list prepared with a double normalization process. The court ordered the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) to create a fresh state rank list for in-service candidates using normalized scores instead of raw scores.

The court stated, "The state merit list of the NEET PG 2024 examination for Madhya Pradesh cannot stand and is therefore quashed. NBEMS must prepare the state merit list again, awarding incentivized marks to in-service candidates based on their normalized scores." The HC bench further instructed NBEMS to complete the task promptly.

Case Background

Medical Dialogues earlier reported that aspirants filed a plea against the double normalization process used in preparing Madhya Pradesh’s state merit list for NEET PG counselling. The petitioners argued that the All India Merit List relied on normalized scores, but the state list recalculated scores by applying normalization to raw scores again, which unfairly impacted their rankings.

Earlier, the court had asked the state government to delay announcing results until November 28. However, it allowed the first round of pre-PG medical counselling to continue until midnight on November 24.

Key Observations

The HC bench criticized NBEMS for inconsistencies in the methodology for preparing the state-specific rank list. It noted that NBEMS used normalized scores for the All India Merit List but reverted to raw scores to calculate incentivized marks in the state list, creating discrepancies.

“Candidates must receive incentivized marks on normalized scores to maintain fairness,” the court emphasized. It explained that normalization, a statistical process, ensures fairness by adjusting scores across different exam shifts with varying difficulty levels.

The court pointed out that awarding incentivized marks to raw scores before normalization exaggerated the discrepancies. For instance, a 1.6736% difference in difficulty between two shifts resulted in some candidates receiving an effective incentive of 31.6736% instead of 30%. Such compounded advantages significantly affected rankings, especially when calculated to seven decimals.

Highlighted Discrepancies

The court questioned the anomalies in rankings. It noted that candidates with higher rankings on the All India List received lower rankings on the State List, despite competing in the same examination. “Relative performance cannot change when candidates appear on different lists,” the court asserted.

Fresh Merit List Directive

The court directed NBEMS to revise the state merit list by awarding incentivized marks based on normalized scores, ensuring fairness. It emphasized that the list must reflect substantive merit rather than comparative merit.

Reactions to the Verdict

Dr. Rohan Krishnan, former chairman and current patron of the Federation of All India Medical Associations (FAIMA), expressed his concern on X (formerly Twitter). He criticized the normalization process and urged authorities to address aspirants' grievances, calling for accountability.

This decision sets a significant precedent by ensuring transparency and fairness in competitive examinations while upholding merit-based principles.