477 PG doctors quit mid-course at AIIMS, JIPMER: what NEET-PG aspirants should know

Right to Information requests have revealed that 477 postgraduate medical students abandoned their courses midway at nine AIIMS centres and JIPMER Puducherry over the past three years—a significant attrition rate that raises urgent questions about the quality of residency training at India's most prestigious medical institutions. Out of approximately 3,130 students who enrolled in postgraduate and super-speciality programmes at these centres, roughly 15% did not complete their courses. The data, obtained by the United Doctors Front, highlights dropout rates as high as 31% at some institutes and points to systemic issues including excessive working hours, workplace culture, and inadequate support for resident doctors. For NEET-PG aspirants preparing to choose their postgraduate institution and speciality, this information is critical: it suggests that admission to a top-ranked centre does not guarantee a supportive training environment.

How many doctors quit and where the dropout rates are highest

The RTI data covers a three-year period and includes nine AIIMS institutions (Delhi, Kalyani, Jodhpur, Rishikesh, Raipur, Patna, Nagpur, Gorakhpur, and Bibinagar) plus JIPMER Puducherry. Across these ten centres, 477 students left their postgraduate or super-speciality courses before completion, out of 3,130 total admissions. This translates to an overall dropout rate of approximately 15%.

The highest dropout rates were recorded at AIIMS Gorakhpur (31% of 106 students) and JIPMER Puducherry (27% of 387 students). AIIMS Delhi saw 94 departures out of 591 enrolled students (16%), while AIIMS Rishikesh recorded 70 dropouts from 595 students (12%). AIIMS Jodhpur reported 66 departures from 503 students (13%). These figures suggest that even at India's most competitive and well-resourced medical institutions, a meaningful proportion of doctors are choosing to leave their training midway.

Why doctors are leaving: burnout, long hours, and workplace culture

The United Doctors Front, which obtained this data, has attributed the departures to systemic problems within residency training. According to the organisation's leadership, resident doctors report excessively long working hours, continuous duties extending beyond 36 hours, toxic workplace environments, mental harassment, and inadequate institutional support. These are not isolated complaints—they represent a pattern significant enough to drive doctors away from institutions they worked intensely to enter through the highly competitive NEET-PG examination.

A particularly troubling aspect highlighted is the perpetuation of a 'hazing' culture: the mindset that 'we endured this, so the next generation must too.' This normalisation of suffering, humiliation, and exploitation in the name of medical training creates an environment where physical and mental well-being of resident doctors is routinely neglected. The irony is stark—resident doctors are the backbone of hospital operations, providing round-the-clock clinical care and shouldering enormous patient responsibilities, yet their own welfare is frequently deprioritised.

• Continuous duties extending beyond 36 hours without adequate rest
• Excessive working hours without proportional compensation or recognition
• Toxic workplace culture and mental harassment
• Inadequate institutional support and grievance mechanisms
• Normalisation of suffering as part of 'training'
• Lack of recognition of resident doctors as human beings with basic needs

What this means for NEET-PG aspirants choosing their postgraduate institution

For an MBBS graduate preparing for NEET-PG counselling, this data should inform your decision-making process. While securing admission to a premier institute like AIIMS or JIPMER is a significant achievement, the dropout figures suggest that institutional prestige does not guarantee a healthy training environment. A 27% dropout rate at JIPMER or 31% at AIIMS Gorakhpur means that roughly one in three to four of your batch-mates may leave before completing the course—a sign of systemic stress.

When evaluating a postgraduate seat offer, consider not only the institute's academic reputation and speciality ranking but also its track record on resident welfare. Ask questions during counselling or before joining: What are the actual working hours? What is the grievance redressal mechanism? How many residents have left in recent years, and why? Are there mental health support services? What is the culture like—do seniors mentor or haze? These questions are not frivolous; they directly affect your three to five years of training and your long-term career satisfaction and mental health.

The data also suggests that if you find yourself in a toxic training environment after joining, you are not alone—hundreds of doctors have made the difficult decision to leave. While leaving a postgraduate course carries professional and financial consequences, the message from these numbers is that some training environments are genuinely unsustainable. Understanding this can help you make informed choices about where to invest your time and energy.

The role of regulatory bodies and the need for systemic reform

The United Doctors Front has called for urgent intervention by the government and regulatory authorities. Their demands include investigation into the reasons behind resignations, effective implementation of residency working-hour regulations (which exist on paper but are often not enforced), establishment of independent grievance-redressal mechanisms, and fixing institutional accountability. The organisation has also filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) before the Supreme Court, signalling that this issue is being escalated to the highest judicial level.

Currently, regulations governing resident doctor working hours exist—for example, the Indian Medical Association and various state governments have issued guidelines limiting continuous duty to 24 hours with mandatory rest periods. However, enforcement is inconsistent, and many institutions operate with impunity. The dropout data suggests that these regulations are not being adequately implemented or monitored. Without systemic accountability, the problem will persist, and India risks losing an entire cohort of trained doctors to burnout before they even complete their specialisation.

• RTI data is being used to hold institutions accountable
• PIL filed before Supreme Court to escalate the issue
• Existing working-hour regulations are not being enforced uniformly
• Independent grievance mechanisms are largely absent
• Institutional accountability for resident welfare is weak

How dropout rates vary by institute and what that tells you

The variation in dropout rates across institutes is instructive. AIIMS Bibinagar reported only 2% dropout (3 out of 121 students), while AIIMS Gorakhpur reported 31% (33 out of 106). This suggests that institutional culture, management practices, and working conditions vary significantly even within the AIIMS network. Some centres appear to have better systems in place to support resident doctors, while others are clearly struggling.

When choosing between two offers—say, AIIMS Gorakhpur versus AIIMS Raipur—the dropout data becomes a proxy for institutional health. A lower dropout rate may indicate better working conditions, more supportive senior faculty, or more effective grievance redressal. Conversely, a high dropout rate is a red flag that warrants deeper investigation. You can use RTI requests yourself to obtain more detailed information about a specific institute before accepting a seat, including the reasons residents have cited for leaving and the institute's response to these departures.

The broader crisis: losing doctors to burnout before they complete training

The dropout data reflects a broader crisis in medical education and healthcare workforce development. India invests heavily in training postgraduate doctors through competitive examinations and premium institutions. When a doctor leaves mid-course, that investment is partially lost, and the healthcare system loses a trained professional. More importantly, the loss is personal—a doctor who leaves is often doing so because their physical and mental health is at stake.

The United Doctors Front has warned that if this trend continues, India may face a future where young doctors are unwilling to pursue postgraduate training at all, or where they pursue it abroad where working conditions are better regulated. This would exacerbate India's existing shortage of specialist doctors and weaken the healthcare system. The message is clear: residency training must be reformed to be sustainable, or the system will lose the very doctors it is supposed to train.

What you can do: asking the right questions before joining a PG programme

As a NEET-PG aspirant, you have agency in this process. Before accepting a seat, reach out to current residents or recent alumni of the institute and ask them directly about their experience. What are the actual working hours? Is there a supportive senior faculty? How is the grievance redressal process? Have residents left recently, and if so, why? These conversations will give you a realistic picture that official brochures will not.

You can also file RTI requests to obtain data about your specific institute: How many residents have left in the past three years? What reasons have they cited? What is the institute's response? This information is public and can inform your decision. Additionally, if you join a programme and find yourself in an unsustainable situation, know that you have options—speak to your seniors, file formal grievances, contact the United Doctors Front or similar advocacy groups, and if necessary, seek legal counsel. Your health and well-being are not negotiable, even for a prestigious degree.

• Contact current residents or recent alumni before accepting a seat
• Ask directly about working hours, culture, and grievance mechanisms
• File RTI requests to obtain dropout and attrition data for specific institutes
• Understand that leaving a toxic environment, while difficult, is sometimes the right choice
• Connect with advocacy groups if you face harassment or unsafe working conditions

The path forward: reform, accountability, and protecting resident doctors

The dropout data is a wake-up call for medical education administrators, hospital leadership, and regulatory bodies. The National Medical Commission (NMC) and the National Board of Examinations and Medical Sciences (NBEMS), which oversee postgraduate medical education and DNB counselling, must take this seriously. They should mandate regular audits of resident working conditions, enforce working-hour regulations with penalties for violations, establish independent grievance-redressal mechanisms, and publicly report on resident retention rates.

Institutions must also shift their culture. Training should be rigorous but not brutal. Discipline should not mean humiliation. Dedication should not mean exploitation. Senior faculty must mentor, not haze. Hospital leadership must recognise that resident doctors are not just cheap labour but future specialists and leaders of the healthcare system. Investing in their well-being now will pay dividends in the form of a healthier, more committed medical workforce.

Frequently asked questions

The dropout data from India's premier medical institutes is a clear signal that postgraduate training needs urgent reform. As a NEET-PG aspirant, use this information to ask hard questions before accepting a seat, research institutes thoroughly, and understand that prestige does not guarantee a healthy training environment. Your choice of institution and speciality will shape the next three to five years of your life—make it an informed one.