Quote:
Originally Posted by xpedior
Well I cant understand one thing. Y interview pattern was not uniform. Some people were engaged in discussions, other like me, were bombarded with token questions and 90% of them were only about dates and names.
Moreover, Panels obsession with serving CSPs was also evident from fact that they involved them in discussion, ideas and opinions, whereas others were put dealt by asking dates and names and even treated harshly.
To me, criteria has prevailed over merit. Eligibility was given preference over suitibility. But any how SPSC has performed much higher than expectations of aspirants in these corrupt times.
Regards
|
Dear i think there was not much difference in interview method.
Most of the candidates were asked both analytical and token questions.It was upto panel's mood wether they like your arguments or one-liner.
My interview was a mixture of analytical and token questions.It started with some discussion then token questions were bombarded and ended up with discussing Syrian crisis.
After a dedicated interview preparation of more than 4 months i was able to answer them above 70 percent. I left interview room with a complacent feeling.
Moreover,written score has played a vital role in allocations.Most of the candidates with low scoring subjects have remained unallocated.
Luckily, this lunatic bird has found its nest in excise and taxation dpt.
Allocated as excise and taxation officer.
Planning to appear in css 17 also as its my last attempt.Birds rarely find a permanent residence, so preparing for a new flight.