1. The grievance projected in the writ petition is that petitioner is meritorious as compared to respondents 6 and 7 but was not selected for the degree course in the discipline of P&FM and has sought quashment of selection of respondents 6 and 7 against the post of degree course in the said discipline on the ground that they are inferior in merit. 2. The writ petition on the face of it merits to be dismissed for the following reasons: The admission is to be made in any discipline by or before 31st day of May, 2007. Even if post is vacant or falls vacant no selection can be made after 31st day of May, 2007. This court in a judgment delivered in case titled Aadil Ashraf Vs. J&K Board of Professional Examination 2007 (3) JKJ HC-523 (OWP No.464/2007), has laid down the same law. It is profitable to reproduce the relevant portions of page Nos.5 and 10 of the said judgment herein: "In terms of Rule 13(11) contained in brochure, the admission was to be finally closed on 31.5.2007. The petitioner was supposed to remain vigilant and cautious and should have remained present before the Board on 31.5.2007 because the admission had to be closed on the very date. But on his own showing he came to know on 11.6.2007, meaning thereby that he remained in deep slumber till 11.6.2007." "Keeping in view the terms and conditions contained in the brochure and the judgments (supra), I am of the considered view that admission cannot be granted to the petitioner after cut of date." 3. Apex Court in case titled Miridul Dhar v. Union of India, (2005)2 Supreme Court Cases 65 held that the authorities are commanded not to admit candidates in mid session and that too after cut of date. It is profitable to reproduce para 8 and 9 of the judgment herein: "8. In Medical Council of India v. Madhu Singh while making it clear that no admissions can be granted after the schedule date, which essentially should be the date for commencement of the course, MCI was directed to ensure that the examining bodies fix a time schedule specifying the duration of the course, the date of its commencement and the last date for admission. It was further directed that different modalities for admission can be worked out and necessary steps like holding of examination if prescribed, counseling and the like have to be completed within the specified time and no variation of the schedule so far as admission are concerned shall be allowed. In case of any deviation by the institution concerned, action as prescribed shall be taken by MCI. 9. The Ministry of Head and Family Welfare, government of India convened a meeting of the State Health/ medical Education Secretaries and the vice Chancellors of the universities of health sciences and as a result of the discussion issued a directive dated 14.05.2003 to the Secretaries of Health and Medical Education in all the State and Union Territories and to all universities awarding medical dental degrees laying down the policy guidelines on admission of students and other allied matters, inter alia, having regard to the decision in Madhu Singh case laying down the schedule for completion of the various stages of admission process, commencing of academic session and closure of admissions in courses of medicine and dentistry to be applicable to all medical and dental colleges in the country from the academic sessions 2003-04 onwards. All State Governments, Universities, medical and dental institutions in the country and any other authorities concerned were directed to strictly abide by the time frame for completion of each of the stages of admission process indicated in the time schedule. It also directed that neither shall any student be admitted in any course of medicine or dentistry after expiry of the last date prescribed for closure of admissions in that course nor shall any university register any such admission sought to be made. The State Governments were directed to take all necessary steps to prevent deviation from the prescribed schedule." 4. The Apex Court has laid down the same principle in case titled Medical Council of India v. Madhu Singh and others (2002)7 Supreme Court Cases 258. 5. The writ petition came to be filed on 17th day of July, 2008. It was too late in the day. 6. The writ petition merits to be dismissed on other grounds also. 7. The Apex Court has laid down the same principle in case titled Medical Council of India v. Madhu Singh and others (2002)7 Supreme Court Cases 258. 5. The writ petition came to be filed on 17th day of July, 2008. It was too late in the day. 6. The writ petition merits to be dismissed on other grounds also. 7. Admittedly, petitioner made a grade and was called for counseling and at the time of counseling he had exercised option and had given choice for selection in the said discipline at SKIMS and GMC, Srinagar and not at GMC, Jammu. The seats which had fallen vacant were at GMC, Jammu. Thus, on his own showing this writ petition merits to be dismissed. 8. Mr. Haqani after noticing the said facts made a submission that the petitioner be given seat in the next year in a fresh selection. 9. The said relief cannot be granted for the simple reason that it would affect rights and interests of candidates who have to compete in the next session. 10. Viewed thus, the writ petition is dismissed along with all connected CMPs. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated.