JUDGMENT : N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J. This appeal is filed against order of learned Single Judge made in OWP No. 600/2015 dated 29.10.2015, giving direction to the appellants to consider the 1st respondent/writ petitioner as ALC category while according consideration for admission to MD/MS/PG Diploma and MDS in terms of notification No. 01-BOPEE of 2015 dated 08.01.2015 against the seat reserved by the Division Bench in terms of order dated 28.05.2015 2. The case of the 1st respondent before the Writ Court was that she applied for admission to MD/MS/PG Diploma Course after passing MBBS degree pursuant to the advertisement issued by the 1st appellant bearing Notification No. 01-BOPEE of 2015 dated 08.01.2015 The said application was submitted before the last date of submission for the same, i.e. before 27.01.2015 In the application the 1st respondent mentioned her category to be “open merit”. According to the 1st respondent, even though she had obtained certificate stating that she belongs to the area adjoining Actual Line of Control (ALC) in the year 2009, the said certificate was valid only for a period of 5 years and the said certificate having not been renewed, she applied as open merit candidate. Entrance test for selection was conducted on 15.03.2015 and the result/merit list of the candidates under open as well as reserved categories was published on 04.04.2015 the 1st respondent could get the ALC certificate only on 10.04.2015 and thereafter she filed writ petition on 08.05.2015, by that time counseling for MD/MS/PG courses has already been commenced. 3. In the writ petition an interim order was passed to consider her claim, treating as candidate belonging to ALC category based on the renewed ALC certificate, which the 1st respondent may produce at the counseling and to consider her case for allocation of discipline/stream under that category. The said order was challenged in LPAOW No. 26/2015 and the Division Bench by order dated 28.05.2015 modified the said order and gave direction to keep one seat under ALC category unfilled till main writ petition is disposed of or an order in this regard is passed. The said order was challenged in LPAOW No. 26/2015 and the Division Bench by order dated 28.05.2015 modified the said order and gave direction to keep one seat under ALC category unfilled till main writ petition is disposed of or an order in this regard is passed. The said order was passed on 28.05.2015 thereafter the writ petition was listed and heard by the writ Court, which was allowed as stated supra on 29.10.2015 holding that the status of the 1st respondent being resident of actual line of control even prior to the issuance of the notification and the 1st respondent having applied under ALC category, though at later point of time, the same being beyond her control, her claim has to be considered under ALC category. The said order is challenged by the appellants by contending that the 1st respondent having claimed her seat in her application under open merit category and not enclosed certificate of ALC, the order of the writ Court is unsustainable as it is beyond the claim made by the 1st respondent in her application itself. It is also contended in the appeal that the last date for admission to PG courses was over by 31.05.2015, order of the writ Court dated 29.10.2015 giving direction to admit the 1st respondent cannot be complied with particularly for admission to the academic year 2015-16 in terms of the judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court as the last date for admission i.e. 31.05.2015 was over. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants reiterated the said submissions. 5. Per contra, learned senior counsel appearing for the 1st respondent argued that there is no dispute with regard to the status of the 1st respondent as she belonged to ALC category. The 1st respondent was having a certificate issued by the competent authority in the year 2009, the validity of which expired in the year 2014 and she has applied for renewal and the renewal certificate was issued only in 10.04.2015 and once it is renewed the status of the 1st respondent will relate back to the date of original certificate. Learned senior counsel further submitted that in the application form the 1st respondent was prevented from claiming the seat under ALC category as she was not in possession of ALC certificate. Learned senior counsel further submitted that in the application form the 1st respondent was prevented from claiming the seat under ALC category as she was not in possession of ALC certificate. Therefore, she filled up the form under open merit category and the same cannot be put against the 1st respondent for denial of admission. 6. Learned senior counsel also submitted that the seat having been kept vacant prior to the cut off date pursuant to the Division Bench order and the said seat being available as on today, the admission ordered by the learned Single Judge after cut off date is not in violation of the judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court. 7. We have considered the rival submissions. 8. Issues, which arise for consideration in this appeal are:- (a) Whether the candidate, who applied under open merit category is entitled to claim ALC reserved category seat; and (b) Whether admission can be ordered to be given in PG Medical courses beyond cut off sate i.e. 31.05.2015 in the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition before the Writ Court, the 1st respondent admitted that instead of rightly filling her category as ALC filled her category as “open merit” in her OMR form obtained in pursuance of notification No. 01-BOPEE of 2015 dated 01.01.2015 and competed in the process of selection. It is also asserted and admitted that Admit Car bearing Roll No. 110753 was issued to the 1st respondent and she secured rank at serial No. 347 with 166 marks under open merit category. The result/selection list was announced on 02.04.2015 Thus it is evident that even on the date of publication of the merit list, i.e. on 02.04.2015 the 1st respondent was not in possession of the ALC certificate and she could get the said certificate from the Tehsildar, Haveli on 10.04.2015 In such circumstances, it is beyond doubt that the petitioner has not applied under the ALC category for admission to PG degree course for the year 2015-16. 10. 10. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in decision reported as AIR 2012 SC 1803 (Bedanga Talukdar v. Saifudullah Khan) considered the similar claim made by a candidate for combined competitive examination for various posts and the candidate, who has applied as a general candidate claims consideration of her candidature as SC candidate by submitting SC certificate after completion of examination process. The High Court entertained the writ petition and gave direction to consider her candidature as SC candidate, which was set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by specifically stating that the cast certificate submitted after selection process was over and publication of the select list ought not to have been entertained by the High Court and the candidate once applied as a general candidate is not entitled to claim his/her candidate under SC category. It is worthy to mention here that if the seat was claimed under ALC category and the certificate was produced later on the possibility of considering the case will arise. 11. In this case the 1st respondent has not claimed seat under ALC category for admission in PG course, hence order of the learned Single Judge giving direction to treat the 1st respondent as ALC category candidate and consider her for admission against the vacant seat cannot be accepted when the 1st respondent was not vigilant while submitting her application as well as in getting renewal of her ALC status, which the 1st respondent could get only after the merit list for admission was published. 12. In light of the findings rendered on issue No. 1 the question of granting admission beyond the cut off date does not arise, hence the issue regarding giving direction to admit the student in PG course after the cut off date needs no finding. 13. This appeal is allowed. Order of the learned Sing Judge is set aside. No costs.