1. Rounding off of percentages in Public Service Commission calculations — Dispute over whether 32.5% can be rounded to 33%. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1995 Supreme(SC) 1115
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K Ramaswamy, S Saghir Ahmad
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER, APPELLANTS
VERSUS
ASHA MEHTA, RESPONDENT.
Civil Appeal No. 3863 of 1993, decided on November 9, 1995.
Important Points
The practice of rounding off percentages in arithmetical calculations can be upheld if it is fair and supported by precedent.
Subject
Administrative Law - Public Service Commission
Act Referred
Headnote
Rounding Off - Public Service Commission - The court upheld the practice of rounding off percentages in an arithmetical calculation, as adopted by the Public Service Commission and supported by earlier precedents.
Fact of the Case:
The Public Service Commission rounded off 32.5% to 33%, which was challenged in court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the rounding off was a fair arithmetical calculation and upheld the practice adopted by the Public Service Commission.
Issues: The issue was whether rounding off 32.5% to 33% was justifiable.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the fairness of the arithmetical calculation and the precedent set by the Public Service Commission.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether the rounding off of 32.5% to 33% by the Public Service Commission warrants judicial interference under Article 136 of the Constitution. (Para 1 )
3. Rounding off 32.5% to 33% is a purely arithmetical calculation consistently applied by the Public Service Commission and supported by precedents. (Para 1 )
4. Consistent arithmetical rounding procedures adopted by the Public Service Commission and upheld by the High Court do not justify interference under Article 136 of the Constitution. (Para 1 )
5. Appeal dismissed. (Para 2 )
6. Can a percentage like 32.5% be rounded off to 33% in Public Service Commission calculations?
Yes, provided the rounding is a purely arithmetical calculation and a procedure that the Public Service Commission has consistently adopted in all other cases. (Para 1 )
7. Under what circumstances will the court refuse interference under Article 136 regarding arithmetical rounding?
Interference under Article 136 is declined when the rounding is a purely arithmetical calculation consistently adopted by the Commission and supported by precedents and High Court findings. (Para 1 )
ORDER
1. The question whether 32.5% could be rounded off to 33% is purely an arithmetical calculation, a procedure which the Public Service Commission in fairness has been adopting in all other cases. The High Court had noticed this aspect of the matter and also relied upon earlier precedents in support thereof. In that view of the matter, we do not think that it is a fit case for a interference under Article 136 of the Constitution.
2. The appeal is dismissed. No costs.
