RRBs publish cut-offs only when results are declared, and they publish them board by board. This page reproduces the official figures from the last declared Level 1 (Group D) result: the CBT result of CEN 08/2024 published on 1 July 2026, with the normalised cut-off marks for the candidates shortlisted for the Physical Efficiency Test (PET). Every number comes from an RRB notice linked in the sources. Nothing is estimated.
What the cut-off is, and what it is not
- It is a PET shortlisting cut-off. The notices say candidates are called for PET in a number equal to three times the community-wise vacancy, in order of CBT merit. The published cut-off is the normalised score of the last candidate shortlisted in each category.
- It is not the final cut-off. PET is qualifying, and document verification follows at a 1:1 ratio with vacancies. We found no final result for CEN 08/2024 on the portal listing we read.
- It is a normalised score. RRB's notice of 9 February 2026 sets out percentile scores per shift, merged and then converted to normalised marks. The paper is out of 100, but a normalised mark is not the same as a raw mark.
- It is per RRB and per category. Each board declared its own figures.
CEN 08/2024: normalised cut-off marks for PET shortlisting (declared 1 July 2026)
CEN 08/2024 advertised 32,438 vacancies in Level 1 posts. The CBT was held from 27 November 2025 to 10 February 2026. Figures as printed in each board's notice:
| RRB | UR | SC | ST | OBC | EWS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ahmedabad | 72.16340 | 66.06265 | 62.13333 | 71.14374 | 67.66500 |
| Ajmer | 79.70181 | 71.49931 | 71.53425 | (blank in the notice) | 70.90495 |
| Bengaluru | 70.28633 | 62.28060 | 60.43210 | 64.87319 | 60.40044 |
| Bhopal | 77.73449 | 73.65820 | 67.67090 | 77.41022 | 75.07329 |
| Bhubaneswar | 76.68726 | 67.15071 | 58.18910 | 75.43104 | 69.81246 |
| Bilaspur | 76.14274 | 67.53247 | 62.23323 | 75.04462 | 69.90945 |
| Chandigarh | 72.21081 | 65.85513 | 60.69532 | 70.29683 | 66.68571 |
| Chennai | 78.00694 | 70.63490 | 63.00000 | 76.65663 | 71.11270 |
| Guwahati | 77.62741 | 73.86369 | 66.06071 | 76.96997 | 74.73309 |
| Kolkata | 80.22615 | 73.57685 | 63.27346 | 76.97864 | 72.02378 |
| Mumbai | 77.89874 | 71.31083 | 65.23729 | 77.13178 | 74.09858 |
| Patna | 78.45459 | 67.60033 | 61.40324 | 78.28360 | 75.19343 |
| Prayagraj | 78.12573 | 72.40928 | 66.65840 | 77.31772 | 74.14863 |
| Ranchi | 72.85726 | 58.93890 | 61.96082 | 71.82013 | 61.63636 |
| Secunderabad | 76.99514 | 68.93460 | 65.79706 | 76.94165 | 69.42617 |
Notes on the table:
- RRB Ajmer's notice leaves the OBC cell empty. We have not filled it.
- RRB Patna's notice is a scanned image; we read the figures from the image.
- Some boards print fewer decimals than others (for example 72.1634 and 67.665 for Ahmedabad); trailing zeros above are only padding.
- RRB Gorakhpur is missing. The portal listing we read showed no result or cut-off notice under CEN 08/2024 for Gorakhpur, so we do not give figures for it.
Reading the spread
These are arithmetic observations on the table, not forecasts:
- UR cut-offs range from 70.28633 (Bengaluru) to 80.22615 (Kolkata), a gap of about 9.94 marks across 15 boards.
- Two clusters. Four boards are at 70 to 73 for UR (Bengaluru 70.29, Ahmedabad 72.16, Chandigarh 72.21, Ranchi 72.86). The other eleven are between 76.14 and 80.23.
- OBC is close to UR in many boards (for example Bhopal 77.41 against 77.73 UR, Patna 78.28 against 78.45), which is what you would expect when many OBC candidates compete near the General line. SC and ST sit lower, by anything from about 3.8 marks (Guwahati SC) to about 13.9 (Ranchi SC) against UR, and the order of SC and ST is not the same in every board.
- Ajmer shows ST (71.53) just above SC (71.50). Ranchi shows SC (58.94) below ST (61.96). Both are as printed.
Because every board has its own number, the useful figure for you is the one for the RRB you applied to and your own category.
The floors under the cut-off
The notices set the minimum percentage for CBT eligibility: UR 40%, EWS 40%, OBC (Non-Creamy Layer) 30%, SC 30%, ST 30%. On a 100-mark paper that is 40 or 30 marks. The actual shortlisting cut-offs above are far higher. Qualifying alone does not shortlist anyone.
CEN 09/2025 (22,195 vacancies): no cut-off yet
CEN 09/2025 was published on 31 January 2026 with 22,195 vacancies. Its CBT ran from 3 to 25 August 2026, and the objection window closed on 17 September 2026. As of 7 October 2026 we did not find a result or cut-off on the RRB portal listing. Do not treat the CEN 08/2024 table as a forecast: cut-offs depend on paper difficulty across shifts, the number of candidates (RRB's notice of 25 August 2026 lists 52,39,760 tentative applications for CEN 09/2025) and the vacancies per board.
How to use these numbers
- Compare normalised with normalised. Your Pareeksha mock score is a raw score. A mock that gives you a mid-70s raw score is not guaranteed to land at a mid-70s normalised mark. Treat the table as a reference for how high the bar was, then aim well above it in mocks. This is our advice, not an RRB statement.
- Check your percentile, not just your score. On Pareeksha everyone in a cohort sits the same fixed paper, so your percentile is a like-for-like comparison. See how fixed-paper percentile works.
- Remember PET. The cut-off only gets you to PET. The standards are on the syllabus page and the exam pattern page.
- Pick the number for your category and board. The table shows a spread of about 10 marks in UR across boards and larger differences between categories.
What this page does not have
- Earlier years are not included, because we only publish figures we have read from an RRB notice.
- Final cut-offs after PET, document verification and the final result of CEN 08/2024: not found yet.
- The CEN 09/2025 CBT result and cut-off: not yet published on the listing we checked.
- Category-wise PwBD, ex-servicemen and CCAA cut-offs, and candidate counts shortlisted per board: not reproduced. The shortlist PDFs are on each board's RRB page.
- Gorakhpur figures, as noted above.
Related: Syllabus · Exam pattern · Preparation strategy