Experts raise concerns
The Union government recently announced that the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) will be made mandatory for admission to physiotherapy and other allied health courses under a newly introduced competency-based curriculum. This move is said to be a part of a comprehensive overhaul of 10 professional programmes.
On April 23, the Union Health Ministry, alongside the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions (NCAHP), unveiled the updated curriculum. According to a press release, the revised curriculum seeks to establish "consistency in educational content and delivery," and is set to be implemented across the country from 2026.
Among the 10 courses with revised curricula, five (physiotherapy, nutrition and dietetics, optometry, dialysis therapy, and medical radiology and imaging technology) will now require students to appear for NEET to gain admission. This move has sparked concern among educationists and professionals in the allied health sectors.
PB Prince Gajendra Babu, educationist and general secretary of the State Platform for Common School System-Tamil Nadu (SPCSS-TN), criticised the decision, calling it a slow push to bring allied medical courses under the umbrella of NEET.
“Courses like Nutrition and Dietetics are not like other medical programmes that involve diagnosis of internal organs. These fields focus on sustainable dietary practices and assessing general health. Requiring NEET for such courses is unnecessary and will discourage aspiring nutritionists, especially from underprivileged backgrounds,” Babu said.
He referred to a statement made by BR Ambedkar in the Bombay Legislative Council during the discussion on Bombay University Bill on 27th July, 1927. Ambedkar had observed, “Examination is something quite different from education, but in the name of raising the standard of education, they are making the examination so impossible and so severe that the backward communities which have hitherto not had the chance of entering the portals of University are absolutely kept out.”
He further added, “A people’s movement is the only language the Union government understands.”
The revised curriculum initiative is a joint effort by the Union Health Ministry and the NCAHP. The 10 revised disciplines include physiotherapy, applied psychology and behavioural health, optometry, nutrition and dietetics, dialysis therapy, radiotherapy, medical radiology and imaging, anaesthesia, health information management, and physician associate programmes.
A look into the new eligibility criteria shows that NEET is now mandatory for admission to several of these courses, though requirements vary.
For physiotherapy, NEET is strictly required, with the guideline stating, “No candidate would be admitted on any ground unless he/she has appeared in the NEET examination.”
For optometry and nutrition and dietetics, admission will be based on “NEET exam/equivalent exam conducted by the Government of India (for both UG and PG programmes) followed by a counselling session”. However, there is no clarity on what the equivalent examination will be.
In medical radiology and imaging technology, students must complete 10+2 education, but selection is through NEET.
For dialysis therapy, universities “can consider candidates who appeared for NEET, along with 50%” score in higher secondary examinations or “university/state entrance examination”.
According to an official release by the Ministry, the aim of the curriculum is to strengthen the country's healthcare delivery system and align training with the rising demand for allied health services and the growing burden of disease. It also said that the aim is to align India’s training programmes with global healthcare standards.
Dr Shanthi AR, secretary of the Doctors’ Association for Social Equality (DASE), linked the move to a broader centralisation agenda titled ‘One Nation, One Health System 2030’.
“The Union government does not respect India’s federal structure,” she said. “This is part of a pattern: one nation, one religion, one language, one election, one culture, one ration, and now one health system.” She warned that NEET would gradually be extended to more medical courses.
The release stated that the curriculum development involved consultations with academic experts, professional associations, and other stakeholders. The changes were said to have been made in accordance with the NCAHP Act, 2021.
Dr Ezhilan Naganathan, Thousand Lights MLA and secretary of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) Doctors’ Wing, expressed strong opposition saying, “India is a vast country with a graded social hierarchy and a large population living below the poverty line. In Tamil Nadu, we had a model that encouraged healthcare access by enabling the commoner to become a doctor. NEET shattered that model. Students who failed to become a doctor because of NEET would consider physiotherapy, but this move has now become a barrier for them.”
“Before NEET, school principals and teachers proudly spoke about student achievements. Now, only coaching centres boast about their top ranks and admissions,” he added.
He further added that NEET distances healthcare from the people who need it most and vowed that Tamil Nadu would fight the move both politically and legally.
Tamil Nadu has long been at the forefront of opposition to NEET. On September 13, 2021, the state’s Legislative Assembly unanimously passed a legislation seeking exemption from NEET-based admissions for undergraduate medical courses in government institutions. The law was based on the recommendations of a high-level committee chaired by retired judge AK Rajan, which studied NEET’s impact on students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
The Tamil Nadu government's efforts to exempt the state from NEET for medical admissions have faced significant setbacks. Despite the state Assembly passing the NEET Exemption Bill twice – first in September 2021 and again in February 2022 – the Union government has withheld assent, effectively rejecting the legislation. Chief Minister MK Stalin expressed strong opposition to this decision, describing it as a "dark phase for federalism".
Written by:
Nithesh Kumar M
Edited by:
Azeefa Fathima
ublished on:
28 Apr 2025, 7:49 pm
The Union government recently announced that the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) will be made mandatory for admission to physiotherapy and other allied health courses under a newly introduced competency-based curriculum. This move is said to be a part of a comprehensive overhaul of 10 professional programmes.
On April 23, the Union Health Ministry, alongside the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions (NCAHP), unveiled the updated curriculum. According to a press release, the revised curriculum seeks to establish "consistency in educational content and delivery," and is set to be implemented across the country from 2026.
Among the 10 courses with revised curricula, five (physiotherapy, nutrition and dietetics, optometry, dialysis therapy, and medical radiology and imaging technology) will now require students to appear for NEET to gain admission. This move has sparked concern among educationists and professionals in the allied health sectors.
PB Prince Gajendra Babu, educationist and general secretary of the State Platform for Common School System-Tamil Nadu (SPCSS-TN), criticised the decision, calling it a slow push to bring allied medical courses under the umbrella of NEET.
“Courses like Nutrition and Dietetics are not like other medical programmes that involve diagnosis of internal organs. These fields focus on sustainable dietary practices and assessing general health. Requiring NEET for such courses is unnecessary and will discourage aspiring nutritionists, especially from underprivileged backgrounds,” Babu said.
He referred to a statement made by BR Ambedkar in the Bombay Legislative Council during the discussion on Bombay University Bill on 27th July, 1927. Ambedkar had observed, “Examination is something quite different from education, but in the name of raising the standard of education, they are making the examination so impossible and so severe that the backward communities which have hitherto not had the chance of entering the portals of University are absolutely kept out.”
He further added, “A people’s movement is the only language the Union government understands.”
The revised curriculum initiative is a joint effort by the Union Health Ministry and the NCAHP. The 10 revised disciplines include physiotherapy, applied psychology and behavioural health, optometry, nutrition and dietetics, dialysis therapy, radiotherapy, medical radiology and imaging, anaesthesia, health information management, and physician associate programmes.
A look into the new eligibility criteria shows that NEET is now mandatory for admission to several of these courses, though requirements vary.
For physiotherapy, NEET is strictly required, with the guideline stating, “No candidate would be admitted on any ground unless he/she has appeared in the NEET examination.”
For optometry and nutrition and dietetics, admission will be based on “NEET exam/equivalent exam conducted by the Government of India (for both UG and PG programmes) followed by a counselling session”. However, there is no clarity on what the equivalent examination will be.
In medical radiology and imaging technology, students must complete 10+2 education, but selection is through NEET.
For dialysis therapy, universities “can consider candidates who appeared for NEET, along with 50%” score in higher secondary examinations or “university/state entrance examination”.
According to an official release by the Ministry, the aim of the curriculum is to strengthen the country's healthcare delivery system and align training with the rising demand for allied health services and the growing burden of disease. It also said that the aim is to align India’s training programmes with global healthcare standards.
Dr Shanthi AR, secretary of the Doctors’ Association for Social Equality (DASE), linked the move to a broader centralisation agenda titled ‘One Nation, One Health System 2030’.
“The Union government does not respect India’s federal structure,” she said. “This is part of a pattern: one nation, one religion, one language, one election, one culture, one ration, and now one health system.” She warned that NEET would gradually be extended to more medical courses.
The release stated that the curriculum development involved consultations with academic experts, professional associations, and other stakeholders. The changes were said to have been made in accordance with the NCAHP Act, 2021.
Dr Ezhilan Naganathan, Thousand Lights MLA and secretary of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) Doctors’ Wing, expressed strong opposition saying, “India is a vast country with a graded social hierarchy and a large population living below the poverty line. In Tamil Nadu, we had a model that encouraged healthcare access by enabling the commoner to become a doctor. NEET shattered that model. Students who failed to become a doctor because of NEET would consider physiotherapy, but this move has now become a barrier for them.”
“Before NEET, school principals and teachers proudly spoke about student achievements. Now, only coaching centres boast about their top ranks and admissions,” he added.
He further added that NEET distances healthcare from the people who need it most and vowed that Tamil Nadu would fight the move both politically and legally.
Tamil Nadu has long been at the forefront of opposition to NEET. On September 13, 2021, the state’s Legislative Assembly unanimously passed a legislation seeking exemption from NEET-based admissions for undergraduate medical courses in government institutions. The law was based on the recommendations of a high-level committee chaired by retired judge AK Rajan, which studied NEET’s impact on students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
The Tamil Nadu government's efforts to exempt the state from NEET for medical admissions have faced significant setbacks. Despite the state Assembly passing the NEET Exemption Bill twice – first in September 2021 and again in February 2022 – the Union government has withheld assent, effectively rejecting the legislation. Chief Minister MK Stalin expressed strong opposition to this decision, describing it as a "dark phase for federalism".
