**CASELET 1** Solutions for questions 1-5

2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | ||

City A | 9372 | 11252 | 6127 | 12345 | 9877 | 48973 |

City B | 10765 | 8328 | 7056 | 9362 | 13125 | 48636 |

City C | 12823 | 11675 | 13157 | 14106 | 16132 | 67893 |

City D | 7352 | 9137 | 11346 | 13451 | 15769 | 57055 |

City E | 8767 | 10789 | 12523 | 14323 | 16239 | 62641 |

49079 | 51181 | 50209 | 63587 | 71142 |

1)Total non-local floating population in 2005= 71142 Number of people from the NRI category= 55% of 71142 = 39128 Number of people from the American NRI category = 27.8% of 39128 = 10878 Number of people fromt eh Foreign Nationals category = 18.8% of 71142 = 13375 Number of European NRI’s = 16% of 13375= 2140 Difference = 10878-2140=8738. option (d) 2)Although it looks calculation intensive, you should realize that most of the numbers cancel out Number of non-local North Indian people in City A in 2001= 17% of 26.2% of 9372 number of non-local North Indian people in City A in 2002= 17% of 26.2% of 11252 Hence, percentage change is [(11252-9372)/9372]×100% = 20% Non-local Foreign Nationals of the Asian category in City D in 2001= 46% of 18.8% of 7352 Non-local Foreign Nationals of the Asian category in City D in 2002= 46% of 18.8% of 9137 Hence, percentage change is [(9137-7352)/7352]×100% = 24% %change in % increase = 4/20×100= 20%. Answer is option (b) 3)Number of non-local people from the American Foreign National category in City E in this period = 20% of 18.8% of 62641 = 2355 thousand Total expenditure on hotels in this period in City E due to the American Foreign National category = (3800*2355 thousand) = Rs 895 crore Number of non-local people in City D from the North Indian category in this period = 17% of 26.2% of 57055 = 2541 thousand Total expenditure on hotels in this period in City D due to the North Indian category = (2375*2541 thousand) = Rs 603.5 crore. Difference in expenditure = 291.5 crore. Option (b) 4)Since the percentages remain the same, as in the second question of this caselet, we can take the total of 2001 and 2005 to consider the percentage increase percentage increase = [(71142 – 49079)/49079]×100%= 45%. Option (a) 5)By simple observation, it can be deduced that the highest percentage change occurs from 2003 to 2004. this percentage change can be computed as (63587-50209)/50209≈27% (note that the sub groups do not matter, as they eventually get cancelled out). Answer is option (b)

**CASELET 2** Solutions for questions 6-10 6)6000 minutes can be calculated as(1725*0.8)+(3000*1)+(1000*1.25) = Rs 5960. option (b) 7)Extra cost of the other phone = Rs 330. When she buys a second phone she saves 275*0.8 = Rs 220. the overheads are 330-220=Rs 110. For each minute above 2000, she will save 20 paise. So by using for 550 minutes, Rs 110 will be saved. Thus at 2550 minutes, both costs are equal. Answer is option (c) 8)4000 minutes can be calculated as (1725*0.8)+(2000) = Rs 3380 2500 minutes can be calculated as (1725*0.8)+(500) = Rs 1880 Difference = 3380-1880 = 1500 9)Going from answer options. Assuming answer option (a) Number of minutes = 550. free minutes = 275. total calculated minutes = 275*0.8 = Rs 220 220+330=550 which is the number of minutes at which she would neither make a profit nor have a loss. Answer is option (a) 10)When number of minutes =1600 Old scheme:- Rental = 330. bill = 1325*0.8 + 330= Rs 1390 New scheme:- Rental= 400. bill=1300*0.8 + 400 = Rs 1440. Increase = Rs 50. Answer is option (a)

**CASELET 3** Solutions for questions 11-17 11) All teams score two points at the end of the first round, hence, the RRD needs to be calculated for each team

MATCH NO. | RUN RATE | RRD |

1 | A=263/50=5.36 B=258/50=5.16 | A=+0.1 B=-0.1 |

2 | B=210/50=4.2 C=211/47.33=4.46 | B=-0.26 B=+0.26 |

3 | A=290/50=5.8 C=260/50=5.2 | A=+0.6 C=-0.6 |

4 | A=185/50=3.7 B=188/40=4.7 | A=-1.0 B=+1.0 |

5 | C=159/50=3.18 B=160/44.83=3.57 | C=-0.39 B=+0.39 |

6 | A=306/50=6.12 C=307/50=6.14 | A=-0.02 C=+0.02 |

After the 6 matches, Net RRD for A = -0.32 Net RRD for B = +1.03 Net RRD for C= -0.71. hence, C will not proceed to the finals. Answer is option (a) 12) There is no parameter mentioned for the consideration of the best performance. Hence, the answer is cannot be determined. 13) C does not make it to the finals (Refer answer for 1st question of this caselet). Its last match is against A. this is the 6th match. C’s Net RRD lags that of A by 0.43. hence, in the final match; run rate of C should exceed that of A by ≥ 0.44. In that match, A has a run rate of 6.12. C should have a run rate of 6.56 or more. Let the number of overs required to achieve this run rate be x. 307/x=6.56, giving x= 46.8 overs. This is approximately 46 overs and 5 deliveries. Hence, if C had won 46 overs and 5 deliveries or earlier; it could have qualified for the finals. Answer is option (c) 14) It can be observed that B made the best comeback after losing its first two matches and then winning its next two matches to make it to the finals. Answer is option (c) 15) Answer is option (d) and the team which has this high RRD is team A. Let us see how Total Runs scored by team A = 263+290+185+306=1044 Wickets lost= 5+3+10+4=22 Run per wicket =1044/22= 47.45 Total runs conceded = 258+260+188+307 = 1013 Wickets taken = 10+10+2+8= 30 Runs per wicket conceded = 1013/30= 33.77 Net runs per wicket = 47.45- 33.77 = 13.6 Other two teams will have a lower value than this. 16) It can be clearly observed from the table and graphs that a Final Victory Margin will not be the highest by calculating the difference between the runs scored by the two teams in any match. It is easy to decipher that the answer to this question lies in match 4, as the higher number of deliveries to spare and lesser number of wickets conceded lead to a higher FVM. The highest for both occurs in match 4 for team CIMA-B The FVM can be calculated as (10-2)*5 + 60 = 100. Answer is option (d) 17) Total income of the betting agency = 1000*10000 = 100,00,000 The number 2 choice has won. Hence, if “x” people have voted for the “number 2 choice”, these people will together win 4000x (since betting on “number 2 choice” at at odds 4:1). Net profit of the agency = 5000000=10000000-4000x x= 1250.

**CASELET 4** Solutions for questions 18-22 18) option (d) All vehicles other than others pay a parking fee 2 wheelers= 14% of 200000= 28000 3 wheelers= 17% of 50000=8500 Cars= 18% of 150000=27000 Vans= 16% of 75000=12000 Trucks 19% of 55000=10450 Total= 85950 19)Option (d) Calculate the parking fee for each of the years using the same logic as above 2005= (16% of 200000)*10 + (14% of 50000)*20 + (13% of 150000)*30 + (15% of 75000)*40 + (20% of 55000)*50 = 2045000 2002= (15% of 200000)*10 + (16% of 50000)*20 + (15% of 150000)*30 + (17% of 75000)*40 + (18% of 55000)*50=2140000 2001= (15% of 200000)*10 + (16% of 50000)*20 + (19% of 150000)*30 + (17% of 75000)*40 + (15% of 55000)*50=2237500 2003 = (14% of 200000)*10 + (17% of 50000)*20 + (18% of 150000)*30 + (16% of 75000)*40 + (19% of 55000)*50= 2262500. Hence answer=2003 20)Option (c) 1)Parking fee collected by trucks can be calculated as = 55000 x 50=2750000 2)Parking fee collected by 2 wheelers can be calculated as= 200000 x 10 = 2000000 Percentage difference in fee collected from trucks different from the parking fee collected by 2 wheelers = difference x 100 = 750000 =37.5% ( hint: take 75 as 3/4) 21) Option (b) Amount contributed by trucks in the total fee collected in 2003 can be calculated as Fee collected by trucks in 2003 = (19% of 55000)*50 = 522500 Total fee collected in 2003 (refer the 1st question of this caselet) =2262500 Percentage = (522500/2262500)x 100 = 23.09% 22) option (b) 2 wheelers = (16 % of 200000)*10 = 320000 3 wheelers = (14 % of 50000)*20 = 140000 total =460000 total parking fee in 2005 (refer the 1st question of this caselet) = 2045000 Percentage contribution of 2 wheelers and 3 wheelers to the parking fee in 2005 = 460000/2045000 x100=22.5%

**CASELET 5** Solutions for questions 23-27 23) The answer is fastest obtained by the process of elimination. Lets take for example, that 360 is the total, then Saurav will score 54 runs, this implies that the number of 4’s he scores will not be an integral number (140/3 x 54/(4×100)) which is not integral. Similarly, the other options can be eliminated. 400 will be the total score 24) Once the total score is obtained as 400 the score table will look as follows.

PLAYER | SCORE |

Saurav | 60 |

Sehwag | 40 |

Rahul | 80 |

Others | 60 |

Number of 6’s scored by Sehwag= 45/100×40= 18 /6= 3 25) Can be calculated as, 40/100×80=32/4=8 26) The table is obtained as follows Total= 14

PLAYER | No of 6’s |

Saurav | 1 |

Sehwag | 3 |

Sachin | 4 |

Rahul | 2 |

Others | 4 |

27) Out of 11 playes, 4 are top-scorers means that 7 players together can score a maximum of 39 each. Score left to distribute among 7 playes= 60, can be distributed among 2 players, hence 7-2=5 will the max no. of players who will not score any runs

**CASELET 6** Solutions for questions 28-32 28) To minimize calculation, take the baseline as 100. Make a table based on 100 as the base value for both parameters in both cities. Taking W1=100, we can approximately calculate the values at all places

PLACE& PARAMETER | W1 | W2 | W3 | W4 | W5 | W6 |

Delhi Temp | 100 | 108 | 111 | 108 | 106 | 107 |

Delhi Humidity | 100 | 103 | 101 | 96 | 93 | 95 |

Mum Temp | 100 | 110 | 118 | 122 | 124 | 124 |

Mum Humidity | 100 | 98 | 95 | 97 | 102 | 98 |

All the answers can now be obtained 29) W3= 95, the lowest 30) Cannot be determined, as we do not have the exact values 31) Temperature decreases by 3% or more only in W4. For Delhi, humidity doesn’t change by more than 5% over the previous week only in W4. Hence answer =b=1 32)Take it as 100, the value wont make a difference, the conditions hold good for week 4 and 6 only in both cases

**CASELET 7** Solutions for questions 33-35 33)Proportion of equity in overall investment 94-95 = 160/316= 0.506 Proportion of equity in overall investment 96-97 = 134/380= 0.35 Ratio of proportion of equity = 0.506: 0.35= 1.44 34)The total funds allocated to equity options in the year 97-98 is 165+28 = 193. the total funds allocated to debt and government bonds is 134+62= 196. Almost equal amounts of funds have been allocated to both debt and equity, hence both would have performed as well as the other. 35)All 3 statements are true. Hence, option d

**CASELET 8** Solutions for questions 36-39 36)In 1995, 85% of 77% of 25 million took up a job= 16.36 million. In 1997, 95% of 76% of 27.5 million took up a job= 19.85 million. % increase = (19.85- 16.36)/16.36= 21.33% 37) Number of students who took a job in Mumbai in 1997= 18% of 95% of 76% of 27.5 million = 3.6 million. Number who took it up in 1999= 25% of 90% of 79% of 28.2 million= 5million. About 1.4 million more students took up a job in Mumbai in 99 compared to 97 38)1995 = 22% of 85% of 77% of 25 million = 3.5 million 1997= 20% of 95% of 76% of 27.5 million= 3.98 million 1999= 15% of 90% of 79% of 28.2 million= 3 million. Total= 3.6 +3.98 + 3 = 10.58 million 39)We need to look for (factor multiplication)1/n -1 = (1.13)1/4 -1 =3%

**CASELET 9** Solutions to Questions 40-44 It is given that the first a batsmen scored multiples of 5.Also the first two scored a total of 50 and the ratio of scores of the first three batsmen Ganguly, Sehwag and Pathan was 6: 4: 3. I.e. either 6x + 4x = 50 or 6x + 3x = 50 or 4x + 3x = 50 As the only possibility is 6x + 4x = 50, Ganguly scored 30, Sehwag scored 20 and Pathan scored 15. Hence Pathan was 3rd in the batting order. Yuvraj scored 5 times that of Sehwag, i.e. 100. Tendulkar scored equal to Sehwag, i.e. 20 Srinath scored 5 times Tendulkar, i.e.100 Hence Yuvaraj and Srinath occupy positives 4 and 5, not necessarily in that order Ganguly = Tendulkar + Extras. Therefore, Extras = 10 Munaf and Mohanty are batsmen 10 and 11, though not necessarily in that order. Together they score 40 which is equal to 25 + Dhoni + Pathan. Hence Dhoni = 0 Batsmen 9 scored 5. As the two who score 0 are consecutive, batsmen 7 scores 0. Hence Tendulkar has only one slot left, i.e. 6. Now all questions can be answered. 40) (b) 41) (c) 42) (d) 43) (d) 44) (d)

**CASELET 10** Solutions for questions 45-50 45) Option (c) “d” can be ignored directly due to the low percentage. Comparing percentage of b and c, b can be ignored.Calculating for USA and OPEC USA=(9% of 40799) + (19% of 33979) = 10126 OPEC=(23% of 40799) + (10% of 33979) = 12777 46) Lowest = others(1% of 40799) + (1% of 33979) ≈748 47)option(a) Eliminate answers where Imports Exports in 98-99 50) Trade Deficit in OEE in 97-98 = (19% of 40799) – (10% of 33979) = 4353 Trade Deficit in OEE in 98-99 = (21% of 42189) – (12% of 32154) = 5001 Percentage growth =(5001-4353)/5001 = 12.9%