SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 351

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
V Kameswar Rao, A.C.J., C M Joshi, J.
Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences - Appellant
Versus
Dr. K. Sree Laxmi, D/O. Amara Linga Reddy And Ors. – Respondents
Writ Appeal No. 448 of 2025, Writ Appeal Nos. 465 of 2025, 597 of 2025. 602 of 2025, 603 of 2025, 604 of 2025, 628 of 2025, 630 of 2025 and 654 of 2025 
Decided On : 26-06-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Dhyan Chinnappa, Senior Counsel, Along With Mrs. Farah Fathima, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mrs. Sumana Baliga, Advocate, Mr. Vivek S. Reddy, Senior Counsel Along With Mr. Yatish S., Advocate, Mr. Nuruddin Khetty, Advocate

Rounding off marks cannot be equated with granting grace marks; eligibility criteria must be strictly adhered to as per regulations.

Headnote:(A) Post-Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023 - Rounding off percentage of marks - Writ appeals challenging the learned Single Judge's direction to round off decimal marks of post-graduate medical students from percentages of 49.25%, 49.50%, and 49.75% to 50% - The regulations stipulate a minimum of 200/400 marks to pass, and no provision for awarding grace marks exists - The court ruled that rounding off is permissible only at the valuation stage and cannot be applied afterward to alter the determination of passing criteria. (Paras 11 & 12)

(B) Legal principles on rounding off marks - The court held that rounding off cannot be equated with granting grace marks, citing the impermissibility of artificially enhancing eligibility scores. Moreover, it pointed out that prior judgments regarding pandemic exemptions were not applicable to this case. (Paras 14 & 16)

Facts of the case:
The respondents, post-graduate medical students, petitioned that their small fractional failures should be rounded up to pass them based on regulations and prior judgments. The university maintained that the regulations strictly required a minimum score with no provision for grace marks.

Findings of Court:
The orders of the learned Single Judge were set aside as incorrect, reaffirming that rounding off is not permitted for determining pass/fail criteria set by the regulation.

Issues: The main question pertained to whether rounding off would grant grace marks under current regulations, which clearly stipulate criteria for passing.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that rounding off marks only at the valuation stage cannot extend to outrightly adjusting pass/fail statuses as such actions unfairly distort established eligibility requirements dictated by the law.

Result: Appeals allowed.

Table of Content
1. appeals against prior writ petitions regarding percentage rounding. (Para 2 , 3)
2. arguments on the entitlement to rounding off marks. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. court's analysis of applicability of rounding regulations. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
4. court decision to set aside previous orders. (Para 18)

JUDGMENT :

V. KAMESWAR RAO, ACJ.

These appeals impugne the order in the writ petitions as under:

Sl. No.Writ Appeal No.Impugned Writ Petitions
1WA No.448/2025 (EDN-RES)Order dated 24.02.2025 in WP Nos. 3438/2025, 3443/2025, 3445/2025, 3464/2025, 3489/2025, 3525/2025, 3539/2025, 3554/2025, 3556/2025, 3671/2025, 4071/2025, 4089/2025, 4090/2025 and 4603/2025
2WA No.465/2025 (EDN-RES)Order dated 24.02.2025 in WP Nos. 3438/2025, 3443/2025, 3445/2025, 3464/2025, 3489/2025, 3525/2025, 3539/2025, 3554/2025, 3556/2025, 3671/2025, 4071/2025, 4089/2025, 4090/2025 and 4603/2025
3WA No.597/2025 (EDN-EX)Order dated 12.03.2025 in WP No.7220/2025
4WA No.602/2025 (EDN-RES)Order dated 12.03.2025 in WP No.6734/2025
5WA No.603/2025 (EDN-EX)Order dated 12.03.2025 in WP No.6113/2025
6WA No.604/2025 (EDN-EX)Order dated 12.03.2025 in WP No.6737/2025
7WA No.628/2025 (EDN-RES)Order dated 12.03.2025 in WP No.6758/2025
8WA No.630/2025 (EDN-RES)Order dated 12.03.2025 in WP No.6127/2025
9WA No.654/2025 (EDN-RES)Order dated 20.03.2025 in WP No.6742/2025

The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petitions by stating in paragraphs No.8 to 10 as under:

“8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the question that arises for consideration is:

"Whether rounding off at a percentage level would be akin to providing grace marks and whether the benefit of the order passed in Dr. Guruprasad's case and other similarly placed petitioners would be applicable to the petitioners as well?"

9. The petitioners are post graduate medical students having failed by a fraction of percentage as stated supra, are knocking at the doors of this Court inter alia contending that the said fraction ought to have been rounded off to the next whole number which would resultantly pass the petitioners. Under the PGMER-2023 Regulation, Regulation 8.4 stipulates that a student should secure a minimum of 40% in each paper with an aggregate of 50% in theory paper and to secure minimum total marks of 200 / 400 for theory and practical plus viva 200/400. It is noticed by this court that the marks obtained by the petitioners, when turned into percentage is arriving at 49.75%, 49.50% and 49.25%. The situation being such that though the petitioners have obtained 197, 198 and 199 out of 200 in theory the percentage, which is arrived is in decimal. In the case of DR.GURUPRASAD stated supra though the decision was rendered during Covid pandemic, the Ordinance dated 29.03.2019 permitted to round off to the next full figure and this court, in DR.GURUPRASAD'S case did not take into account the Covid-19 pandemic, but what was considered by this court is the arithmetical calculation. The Regulations, which was later changed in the year 2020 has now been withdrawn, it is contended by the respondent-RGUHS that rounding off would be akin to granting grace marks. The rounding off a percentage is a matter of arithmetical calculation and not equivalent to granting of grace marks. The PGMER-2023 Regulation does not explicitly prohibit rounding off decimal values in percentage calculation. The percentage to be rounded off to the next whole number is a part of standard mathematical practice. The petitioners who have obtained point percentage, the standard arithmetic rule dictates rounding off to 50%, which is a mathematical adjustment.

10. The point percentage obtained by the students i.e., 0.25%, 0.50% and 0.75% is the marks, which has been obtained and at any rate it cannot be taken away by holding that it has to be 49% and not 50%. For the foregoing reasons, the point framed for consideration is answered in favour of the petitioners and the writ petitions succeed and the petiti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top