17th August, 2019
While RRBs are gearing up for the 2nd Computer Based Test (CBT), discontent among candidates who were not selected for the 2nd CBT is rising. After the result for RRB JE 1st CBT was released, several candidates who were not shortlisted for the 2nd CBT complained about the unfair criteria for selection.
One of the points of contention for candidates is that the recruitment notification said that 1st CBT was only qualifying in nature then why did the RRBs set a cut off for shortlisting.
The main questions raised by candidates include, why individual cut off for different posts, and how can RRBs test a candidate's suitability for a technical post without testing any technical knowledge in the 1st CBT.
We are requesting you to revise the RRB JE results as early as possible..
If you want quality engineers you should select the candidate on his technical skills..So give chance to All the candidates who are cleared the minimum cutoff..thank you
Several candidates also compared this situation to the blunder in preparing 1st CBT result for RRB ALP recruitment last year. The RRBs had made mistake in preparing the 1st CBT result for ALP recruitment and after receiving complaints from candidates had to prepare the result again. After fresh results were announced, many candidates who were disqualified initially became eligible to appear for the 2nd CBT.
Candidates have requested the RRBs to revise the result for RRB JE 1st CBT and release the list of shortlisted candidates again.
We went through the Junior Engineer recruitment notification and found that the recruitment advertisement mentions 1st stage CBT as 'screening' in nature and NOT 'qualifying' in nature.
The official notification says, "The 1st stage CBT is of screening nature and the standard of questions for the CBT will be generally in conformity with the educational standards and/or minimum technical qualifications prescribed for the posts."
The fact that the recruitment notice mentions 1st CBT as screening in nature can cause much difference.
The term 'qualifying in nature' means that a candidate has to score marks equal or above than the qualifying criteria pre-set by the examination authority. On the other hand 'screening in nature' can mean that the marks scored by candidates in the exam will be used to 'screen' eligible candidates from out of those who applied and appeared for the exam.
This renders the argument about fulfilling qualifying criteria invalid but candidate's argument that how can RRBs 'screen' candidates for a technical post without testing their technical knowledge still stands ground.
The official recruitment advertisement also mentions that the raw marks scored by candidates will be normalized. The merit list for candidates eligible for 2nd CBT will be prepared on the basis of the normalized marks.
The notification also said that the number of candidates shortlisted for 2nd CBT 'shall be 15 times the community wise total vacancy of Posts notified against the RRB as per their merit in 1st Stage CBT.'
Railway Recruitment Boards are yet to respond to the candidates.