he standoff over the June 2026 Foreign Medical Graduate Examination (FMGE) continues, with foreign medical graduates seeking relief while the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) maintains that the minimum competency standard for medical practice in India cannot be lowered.

The June examination has come under scrutiny after only 12.38% of the 37,448 candidates who appeared cleared the test. Candidates have raised concerns over the difficulty of the paper, the introduction of video-based questions and examination-centre conditions, leading to protests in Delhi, including a hunger strike by some candidates.

NBEMS had constituted a three-member expert committee headed by Air Marshal (Dr.) Pawan Kapoor (Retd.) to examine the concerns and recommend improvements. The panel has proposed several changes to make the examination more transparent and candidate-friendly, but did not recommend grace or compensatory marks for the June examination.

Sources cited in the report said the committee found no material evidence that the video-based questions or the overall difficulty of the June paper had adversely affected the result. NBEMS has therefore drawn a distinction between improving the examination process and lowering the qualifying standard.

What the June FMGE results show

The overall pass percentage has become the main flashpoint in the dispute, but attempt-wise figures provide additional context.

In June 2026, 35.74% of first-time candidates cleared the FMGE, compared with 21.45% of those appearing for the second time. Among candidates who had taken the examination more than five times, the pass rate fell to 3.29%.

The December 2025 session showed a similar pattern, although the first-attempt pass rate was higher at 47.53%. Only 5.58% of candidates appearing after more than five attempts cleared that examination.

NBEMS officials have argued that the overall pass rate alone cannot establish that the examination was unfair. The board's stated position is that FMGE is a screening examination and that its qualifying standard is linked to the competency expected of doctors who will treat patients in India.

What the expert committee has proposed

Rather than recommending a lower qualifying threshold, the expert panel has proposed changes to the structure and conduct of future FMGE sessions.

One major recommendation is to alter the distribution of questions. The proposed pattern would have 30% low-difficulty questions, 50% moderate-difficulty questions and 20% high-difficulty questions. The panel has also recommended that the mean difficulty level should not exceed 5.5, with the median not exceeding 5 on a 10-point scale.

The committee has also suggested examining the feasibility of conducting FMGE three times a year instead of the current twice-yearly schedule. If implemented, the additional session could reduce the waiting period for candidates who do not clear an attempt. The proposal is not yet an approved change to the examination calendar.

Other recommendations include reviewing the examination fee, improving infrastructure at examination centres and giving candidates access to their recorded responses, subject to technical and legal safeguards.

The committee has also recommended safeguards around the use of multimedia questions. A separate report on the panel's recommendations said the reintroduction of video-based questions should be deferred for at least a year and that candidates should receive adequate information beforehand if such questions are used in future.

Why candidates are still demanding relief

For protesting FMGs, the central issue remains the June examination itself. Candidates have argued that the paper was unusually difficult and that video-based questions were introduced without sufficient preparation or advance notice. Concerns have also been raised about technical and environmental conditions at some examination centres.

The low June pass rate intensified those concerns. However, the expert committee's findings do not currently support compensatory marks, and NBEMS has reiterated that reforms cannot come at the expense of the competency threshold required for patient safety.

The dispute has therefore moved towards a narrower question: whether the June 2026 examination warrants exceptional relief, or whether changes should instead be made prospectively to improve transparency, predictability and the candidate experience.

For now, NBEMS appears open to changes in how FMGE is conducted, including a possible third annual attempt, but the qualifying bar itself remains non-negotiable.