Pune: The results of the Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran’s (MJP) recruitment examination for Assistant Accounts Officer (Gr. B) have come under scrutiny after a Pune-based MPSC aspirant questioned the marking system and sought an independent inquiry into a candidate scoring 99 out of 100 marks in the Accounts section.
Shubham Sanjay Jain, 30, who appeared for the examination, has questioned how the unusually high score was calculated and whether the prescribed marking and normalisation process was followed. Documents shared by Jain and accessed by The Free Press Journal show that the examination was conducted by the Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS) on February 28, 2026.
According to the official result, 1,869 candidates appeared for the Assistant Accounts Officer examination, while five were selected and four were placed on the waiting list. The post had six vacancies, according to the MJP recruitment advertisement.
The examination carried 200 marks, with 20 marks each for Marathi and English, 30 each for General Knowledge and IT, and 100 marks for the technical/Accounts section (T5). The recruitment advertisement specifies 50 questions in the fifth section and 100 marks for the examination’s five-part structure.
The controversy centres on the result of Raj Bharat Gitte, who is ranked first on the select list. The official result records his marks as 15/20 in Marathi, 17.50/20 in English, 30/30 in General Knowledge, 30/30 in IT and 99/100 in T5, giving him an overall score of 191.50/200.
Jain has questioned the calculation of the T5 score.
“My concern is not against any individual candidate. The issue is whether the marks awarded in the examination were calculated strictly according to the rules applicable to all candidates. The authorities should disclose the complete calculation so that every aspirant can be assured that the selection process was fair,” Jain said.
The recruitment advertisement states that marks are calculated after deducting marks for incorrect answers and that, where examinations are conducted in multiple sessions, scores are equated to account for differences in difficulty levels. It also states that test-wise and total marks are recorded up to two decimal places.
Jain has therefore demanded that the candidate’s question paper, response sheet, answer key and raw score be examined. He has also sought details of the calculation from raw marks to the final score, including any normalisation or scaling used.
“If normalisation or scaling has been applied, the formula and the actual calculation should be placed in the public domain. There should be no ambiguity when the future of thousands of candidates depends on a recruitment examination,” he said.
The MJP advertisement further states that the merit list for the relevant posts would be prepared on the basis of marks obtained in the computer-based examination and that candidates needed at least 45% marks to be included in the merit list.
Akshay Jain of the Maharashtra Pradesh Youth Congress has also demanded an inquiry. Speaking to The Free Press Journal, he said, “All candidates must get equal opportunity, transparent evaluation and a fair selection process. IBPS and the Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran must provide an official and mathematical explanation of how the 99/100 score was arrived at.”
The two have sought that the result and selection process be kept in abeyance until the inquiry is completed. If any irregularity is established, they have demanded cancellation of the result and fresh recruitment proceedings as per the rules.
However, the documents by themselves do not establish malpractice. The official advertisement specifically provides for deduction of marks for wrong answers and score-equating in case of multiple sessions. Therefore, the key issue for the authorities to clarify is how the 99/100 T5 score was derived under these prescribed rules.
