Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar: The results of the MMRDA Junior Engineer (Civil) recruitment examination have come under scrutiny after Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) convenor Abhijeet Dipke questioned what he described as striking variations in the performance of some candidates and the unusually high number of toppers from a single Nagpur examination centre.
Speaking to the media, Dipke cited the case of candidates who had reportedly performed poorly in other recent recruitment examinations but secured exceptionally high marks in the MMRDA test. He alleged that one candidate who had scored 70 and 9 marks in the BMC and PMC examinations respectively secured 196 marks in the MMRDA examination, with only around 10–12 days separating the tests.
Dipke also pointed to the concentration of successful candidates at one centre in Nagpur. According to his claim, 13 of the 16 top-ranked candidates appeared from the same examination centre, prompting him to question whether the centre had any unusual advantage or circumstance that could explain the result pattern.
He demanded a detailed investigation into the examination rather than an immediate cancellation or re-test. Dipke said the first priority should be to examine the particular Nagpur centre, analyse the examination data and determine how such extraordinary variations in scores occurred.
Taking a broader view, the CJP leader also raised concerns about the repeated difficulties faced by government-job aspirants, who, he said, are frequently required to campaign over examination notifications, centres, results and appointments. He argued that prolonged uncertainty places an additional burden on candidates who spend years preparing for competitive examinations.
Dipke used a sharp analogy to question the credibility of recruitment processes, saying that if government jobs were to be distributed through “setting”, there would be little purpose in conducting competitive examinations and posts might as well be auctioned like players in the IPL.
The MMRDA has, meanwhile, constituted a three-member committee to examine complaints and objections relating to the provisional merit list, while the authority has maintained that the recruitment process was conducted according to the prescribed rules and procedures.
The allegations raised by Dipke and the aspirants are yet to establish any examination malpractice. The reported score differences and centre-wise concentration would need to be examined through official records and the findings of the inquiry before any conclusion can be drawn.