MEDICINE · KARNATAKA · Private
No. It is the GM entry in the reviewed 2024 Round 2 MBBS-GOVT. publication.
No. These are published cutoff rank values.
No. Keep the year, round, course, seat group, category and rank definition together.
College-specific records, dated evidence and clearly identified gaps.
| Year / round | Course & quota | Category code | Published closing rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 / Round 2 | MBBS-GOVT. | GM | 42,638 |
| 2024 / Round 2 | MBBS-GOVT. | GMK | 94,978 |
| 2024 / Round 2 | MBBS-GOVT. | GMR | 60,375 |
| 2024 / Round 2 | MBBS-GOVT. | 2AG | 81,717 |
| 2024 / Round 2 | MBBS-GOVT. | 2BG | 61,040 |
Authority: Karnataka Examinations Authority. Rank type: the source’s published “cutoff rank”. The PDF header reviewed here does not independently resolve the AIR-versus-state-rank definition, so these values are not relabelled as a different rank scale. Category codes are retained verbatim.
| Year / round | Source group | Category code | Published closing rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 / Round 2 | MBBS-PRIV. | GMP | 96,070 |
| 2024 / Round 2 | MBBS-PRIV. | OPN | 62,531 |
| 2024 / Round 2 | MBBS-PRIV. | MU | 3,94,528 |
| 2024 / Round 2 | MBBS-NRI | NRI | 10,41,680 |
| 2024 / Round 2 | MBBS-OTHERS | OTH | 13,69,069 |
KEA publishes the general medical cutoff list separately from its Private, NRI and Others list. The AJIMS entries appear under M010 in both. Keeping those groups separate prevents the low-fee government-category rank from being presented as the requirement for a private or NRI seat. It also prevents a management-category closing value from being used as a general merit cutoff.
Round 2 is one stage in the 2024 admission process. A later round may have a different result, but no final-cycle value is calculated from these tables. The entries are also not a prediction for 2026 or 2027. Changes in seats, candidate choices and eligibility make a historical rank a reference point rather than an admission assurance.
The original tables contain dashes in some category cells. A dash is not converted into rank zero, and it is not evidence that the college has no seats across every round. Only clearly aligned AJIMS entries are reproduced. The category code, source group and publication period remain attached to each figure.
An exact-college 2026 final category-wise cutoff table was not verified for this update. No current figure is borrowed from an aggregator or inferred from a qualifying score. A NEET qualifying threshold, an allotment closing rank and an exam mark are different measurements. The current admission decision must use the applicable official counselling record.
Worked reading methods—not admission predictions. The following explanations are practical interpretation, not additional verified AJIMS services or guarantees.
Consider the historical GM entry shown on this page. It belongs to AJIMS M010, MBBS-GOVT., the year 2024 and Round 2. Removing any of those fields changes what the number appears to mean. It is not the closing value for every category and not a 2026 requirement. The worked lesson is to read the record as a complete observation: institution, programme, seat group, category, round, year and rank definition. Once those fields are recorded, you can compare it with another observation that uses the same dimensions. A large number without this context is not a usable admission rule.
A historical category closing value does not establish whether you are eligible to claim that category. Eligibility comes from the applicable counselling conditions and verified applicant records. This is especially important when a college offers several kinds of seats. For AJIMS, the historical general list and private/NRI/other list describe different groupings. A reader cannot choose the most favourable number and then assume the corresponding category is available to them. Use the table to understand what was published in that period, and use the current eligibility process to determine which options can legitimately be considered for your application.
A mark is an examination score, while a rank is a position within a defined ordering. Their relationship can differ between examination years. A historical closing rank therefore cannot be converted into a current minimum mark by copying a score from another year’s article. Nor does the qualifying threshold tell you the rank at which AJIMS closed for a particular category. These are different measurements answering different questions. This page retains rank values as rank values and does not manufacture a marks requirement. If a future source provides both score and rank, each should keep its own examination year and definition.
The table preserves the category codes printed in the reviewed KEA record. That is preferable to expanding an unfamiliar abbreviation incorrectly or combining several categories under an attractive label. A category code should be interpreted using the authority’s applicable definitions for that session. The private grouping also needs to remain distinct from the government-category grouping. For AJIMS, the historical MU, GMP, OPN, NRI and OTH entries should not be collapsed into a single “management cutoff”. The grouping and code are part of the evidence, not decorative details that can be removed from a comparison.
A trend requires comparable observations from more than one period. One Round 2 value does not establish whether a category became easier or harder across the entire cycle. To describe movement responsibly, obtain the corresponding earlier and later official entries, check that the seat group and category have not changed, and retain missing values. This update does not fabricate such a series for AJIMS. The historical tables are useful examples, but they are not a trend chart. Where a source changes its table structure or naming, that change needs to be explained before connecting values with a line.
A closing value in a published round is not automatically an opening rank or the final value after every admission stage. Likewise, a worst rank found in a candidate allotment list would be a calculated observation, not necessarily an official cutoff publication. This page uses selected entries from KEA’s own historical cutoff documents and labels their round. It does not claim that they are the final 2024 result or the latest available record. That distinction matters when reading articles that use the word “cutoff” for several different calculations without showing how the number was obtained.
A useful comparison begins by matching the course, year, round, quota, category and rank scale. If any of those fields differ, display the difference instead of presenting the figures as directly equivalent. For example, comparing an AJIMS government-category observation with another college’s private-category observation may tell you little about comparable admission competition. The same principle applies to rank lists with different definitions. This page explicitly leaves the exact AIR-versus-state-scale interpretation unresolved for the reviewed PDF header. It is more accurate to preserve that limit than to create a uniform-looking table using an unverified rank label.
Historical ranks can help organise questions about a shortlist, but they should not be described as a promise that a future option will be allotted. Your preference order also involves the actual fee category, educational setting and personal circumstances. For AJIMS, read the historical rank table beside the Fees and Admissions sections so that the seat identity remains consistent. A category with a much larger closing number may carry a different cost or eligibility requirement. Looking at these dimensions together is useful planning; it does not remove the uncertainty of a later counselling round.
A stronger current update would name the authority, document date, examination year, round status, exact college identifier, course, quota, category, rank definition and whether the figure was published directly or calculated from allotments. It should also explain blank entries and any provisional status. This is the evidence checklist used for interpreting AJIMS, not a claim that all of those current records were accessible in this review. The missing current final table remains a gap. A responsible update replaces uncertainty with a properly identified source, rather than filling it with a prediction presented as a historical fact.
An admission closing value reflects an allotment context, not a direct examination of teaching quality. Candidate preferences, category rules, costs and the set of available options can all affect how a published rank should be interpreted. It would therefore be misleading to turn the historical AJIMS table into a quality ranking of medical colleges. Use the record for its intended admission context and use separate educational evidence when comparing courses or learning environments. This also explains why the site keeps Cutoffs and Rankings as different sections. They may both inform a shortlist, but neither should be renamed or repurposed to make the other look more complete.
0 colleges selectedAdd up to four colleges to compare
