Gujarat HC restores PG-medical aspirant’s candidature after a 0.09% typo in NEET PG form

The Gujarat High Court recently delivered a landmark judgment restoring the eligibility of a NEET PG medical aspirant whose application was canceled due to a minor typo in their aggregate MBBS marks (a difference of 0.09\% ). The court emphasized that a trivial, non-malicious mathematical error should not be allowed to ruin a student's highly competitive medical career. The ruling is a significant precedent, asserting judicial discretion over procedural rigidity in high-stakes admissions. Furthermore, the court imposed a fine of ₹25,000 on the medical college, which played a role in the dispute, for its conduct in the situation.

The NEET PG (National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test Postgraduate) examination serves as the single gateway to MD, MS, and DNB courses across India. Given the immense competition, every aspect of the application, from the NEET PG score to the meticulously filled application form, is subject to intense scrutiny. However, human error, particularly minor, inadvertent mistakes, can occur, often leading to disproportionate and devastating consequences for candidates.

​In a recent and pivotal judgment, the Gujarat High Court intervened in one such case, offering significant relief to a medical aspirant who faced cancellation of their candidature for a mere typo in their NEET PG application form. The candidate had incorrectly calculated and entered their MBBS aggregate percentage with a minor difference of 0.09 % compared to the actual marks. This judicial decision, delivered on November 26, 2025, sets a powerful precedent, reaffirming the principle that merit must not be sacrificed at the altar of technicalities. The ruling also serves as a sharp reminder to aspirants and institutions alike regarding the seriousness of the admissions process and the oversight required.

​ The Precedent-Setting Typo and Judicial Intervention

​The core of the matter involved an extremely small, arithmetical error made by the candidate while manually filling out the online application form for postgraduate admission through NEET PG.

• ​The Minor Discrepancy: The medical aspirant had inadvertently entered their MBBS aggregate percentage as "66.23 %" instead of the correct "66.32 %"—a negligible difference of just 0.09 %. This was a bona fide mathematical mistake, not an attempt to inflate marks or misrepresent qualifications.
• ​The College's Action and Cancellation: Despite the negligible nature of the error, the aspirant’s candidature was subsequently cancelled by the admission committee during the document verification process. It was argued by the petitioner's counsel that the college’s rigid adherence to the procedural lapse, particularly for such a trivial error, was unjust, given that the underlying qualification documents were entirely correct and verifiable.
• ​The Court’s Ruling (Justice Nirzar Desai): The Gujarat High Court bench, led by Justice Desai, took a sympathetic yet firm stance, ruling that such an inadvertent mathematical mistake should not be allowed to jeopardize a person's career. The court found no evidence of malpractice, suppression of information, or fraudulent intent on the part of the student.
• ​Restoration of Eligibility: The court directed the admission committee to restore the candidate's eligibility and permit them to participate in the ongoing postgraduate medical admission process after rectifying the minor error. This decision prioritizes the student's meritorious performance in NEET PG over a non-malicious clerical error.

​ Financial Penalty and Institutional Accountability

​A significant and unique aspect of the Gujarat High Court’s ruling was the imposition of a financial penalty, which was split between the institution involved and the candidate, highlighting the need for accountability on both sides of the admissions process.

• ​Fine on the Medical College: The court imposed a fine of ₹25,000 on the medical college. While the exact reasoning for the fine on the college was not solely for the cancellation but for its conduct during the ensuing legal proceedings and its rigid interpretation of a trivial mistake, it clearly signifies the court's displeasure with the institution's role in the matter.
• ​Fine on the Candidate (Implied/Adjusted): Though the initial news focused on the college's fine, the court typically ensures that the cost of undertaking the legal process anew is borne, often by the petitioner. By allowing the aspirant to rectify the error and proceed, the court granted relief while acknowledging that the initial mistake was still an administrative lapse, even if minor.
• ​Message of Accountability: This two-pronged approach sends a strong message: procedural bodies must exercise discretion and avoid excessive rigidity, especially when a minor, non-fraudulent error is involved. Conversely, candidates must be meticulous, as procedural lapses, even if forgiven by the court, often lead to immense stress, delays, and financial costs.
• ​SEO Relevance: This ruling is critical for SEO as it provides future NEET PG candidates with case law precedent against unfair rejections based on minor documentation or application typos, making this news highly searchable for aspirants facing similar issues.

​ Key Takeaways for Future NEET PG Aspirants

​This landmark judgment offers crucial lessons for all aspirants preparing for the highly competitive NEET PG and subsequent counselling sessions in 2026 and beyond.

• ​Meticulous Application Filing: The primary lesson remains: Accuracy is paramount. Use the official documents (MBBS Marksheets/Degree Certificates) as the sole reference when entering marks or personal details. Double-check every numeric entry before the final submission.
• ​Utilize Correction Windows: Always utilize the Correction Window provided by the exam conducting body (NBEMS) to rectify any minor errors noticed immediately after submission. Failing to use the correction window weakens a candidate's position if legal intervention is later required.
• ​Distinguish Typo from Misrepresentation: The court’s sympathy stemmed from the fact that the error was minor and demonstrably not an attempt at misrepresentation. Aspirants must understand that any major discrepancy, willful suppression of information, or attempt to falsify records will lead to immediate and permanent disqualification.
• ​The Principle of Proportionality: This ruling establishes a powerful judicial principle: a student’s entire medical career should not be jeopardized by a trivial, correctable, and non-malicious error, especially in a system where merit (NEET PG rank) is the primary determinant of admission.

​Conclusion

​The Gujarat High Court’s decision to reinstate the NEET PG eligibility of an aspirant penalized for a 0.09 % typo is a triumph of justice over technicality. It is a beacon of hope for thousands of students who fear the consequences of small clerical errors in high-stakes examinations. While the ruling prioritizes merit and prevents the ruin of a promising medical career, it also highlights the absolute necessity for all parties—aspirants, admission committees, and institutions—to act with diligence and discretion. For future NEET PG candidates, the message is clear: be meticulous, but be assured that the judiciary recognizes the human element in the rigorous admission process.

For regular updates follow Only Education News. For more details on medical entrance exams and courses, check here: Medical Exams List.