JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge The petitioner after doing her matriculation, passed three years diploma course in Civil Engineering from Government Polytechnic College, Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P. In Engineering Colleges in the State, a person holding diploma in any Engineering stream is eligible to seek admission in B. Tech three years course under Lateral Entry Scheme. The petitioner being eligible for seeking admission in B. Tech course under the scheme had submitted her Admission Form online to the first respondent from main General category. Her candidature was considered and she called for counseling schedule to be held on 25th July, 2016 for General Category (Main) and its sub-reserved category, such as Defence, Freedom Fighter, Physically Challenged, IRDP, Sports and Backward classes. 2. In terms of Clause-n of Item No.6, “Admission Procedure”, at pages 10-11, in the Admission Brochure, (Annexure P-1), counseling of the candidates belonging to sub-reserved categories before that of General (Main) Category candidate was required to be conducted. The seats, if any, left vacant in such sub-reserved categories were thereafter to be transferred to General (Main) category at the end of last round of counseling of the concerned category. Accordingly, on 25th July, 2016, counseling for sub-reserved categories of General category was conducted first. 3. We are concerned in this Writ Petition qua the admission against three seats reserved for General (IRDP) sub-category. Against these three seats Ms. Preetika Chauhan, Shri Manish Thakur and Shri Rajender Kumar, being on merits were offered admission. However, during the course of counseling conducted simultaneously and on the same day of the candidates belonging to General (Main) category, Shri Manish Thakur, aforesaid, who was offered admission against one of the seats in the sub-category General (IRDP) had also secured position on merit in General (Main), and as such opted for a seat in another Engineering College of his choice from this category and abandoned the seat of sub-reserved category General (IRDP) against which he was already offered admission in a college perhaps not of his choice. Against the seat abandoned in General (IRDP) category by Shri Manish Thakur, aforesaid, respondent No.2, who was next in merit in that category, opted for that seat there and then and he has been granted admission against the said seat. 4. Against the seat abandoned in General (IRDP) category by Shri Manish Thakur, aforesaid, respondent No.2, who was next in merit in that category, opted for that seat there and then and he has been granted admission against the said seat. 4. The petitioner, who was next in merit in General (Main), claims that since the counseling for General (IRDP) category was over, therefore, in terms of Clause-n of “Admission Procedure” referred to hereinabove, the seat in sub-reserved category General (IRDP) fallen vacant on account of Shri Manish Thakur aforesaid having abandoned the same should have been given to the candidate next in merit in General (Main) category. 5. Learned counsel representing the petitioner has forcefully contended that the seat fallen vacant in General (IRDP) category has wrongly been offered to respondent No.2 next in merit in that category, as according to him the counseling for sub-reserved categories of General (Main) was already over. We are afraid that any such interpretation to the provision contained under the “Admission Brochure” can be given for the reason that admission for General category including its sub categories was scheduled to be held on 25th July, 2016. When Shri Manish Thakur, aforesaid has abandoned the seat offered to him in General (IRDP) category, the counseling for candidates belonging to General (Main) category, was in progress at that time. Since, his name falls in merit in General (Main) category also, therefore, with a view to opt a better College of his choice, he abandoned the seat in General (IRDP) category and opted the seat in General (Main) on merits. Respondent No.2 was next in merit from General (IRDP) category and as the admission for sub-reserved General category and General (Main) being conducted simultaneously and on the same day was in progress, therefore, he opted for the seat fallen vacant in sub-category General (IRDP) and has rightly been offered the admission in the Course. The seat in General (IRDP) could have only been given to a candidate belonging to General (Main) category had there been no other eligible candidate available in General (IRDP) category. Since in that category respondent No. 2 not only in merit but was present also, therefore, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that admission of the said respondent in the Course is contrary to the provisions contained under the Admission Brochure. 6. Since in that category respondent No. 2 not only in merit but was present also, therefore, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that admission of the said respondent in the Course is contrary to the provisions contained under the Admission Brochure. 6. The petitioner no doubt is next in merit in General (Main) category. We hope and trust that in case any seat under Lateral Entry Scheme in any Government College is available and if she can be considered for admission against any such seat, of course, in terms of the provisions under the “Admission Brochure”, respondent No. 1 may consider her for admission against such seat. In the event of the admission, if granted to the petitioner, however, shall not be treated, as a precedent in future. The petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment before respondent No.1, for the needful. 7. The writ petition is however, dismissed, with the above observations, so also the pending applications, if any.