Statement–Argument — Should medical colleges admit students after the session has commenced if seats remain unfilled? Arguments: I. Yes. Unfilled seats weaken the colleges’ finances. II. No. Such late admissions disrupt the learning pace of the entire batch.

Introduction / Context:
Professional medical programs are cohort-structured with sequenced practicals/clinicals. Policy should prioritise academic integrity over revenue objectives.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Seat vacancies exist after term start.
• Late entrants would miss foundational modules, labs, or clinical postings.
• Financial viability is a concern for institutions.

Concept / Approach:
Strong arguments must align with the primary mission: competency and patient safety. Financial concerns are secondary where academic standards may be compromised.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) I is weak: finances cannot outweigh patient-safety-linked training quality.2) II is strong: disruptions impair learning continuity, assessment fairness, and supervision ratios.3) Hence, only II is strong.

Verification / Alternative check:
Most regulators set strict cut-off dates precisely to protect pedagogy and clinical readiness.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Only I/either/both/neither” misalign with the core purpose of medical education.

Common Pitfalls:
Overvaluing revenue at the expense of training standards.

Final Answer:
If only argument II is strong.