ORDER 1. THESE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS HAVE BEEN FILED CHALLENGING THE DECISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, INTER ALIA, HOLDING THAT RULE 5(8) OF THE M.P. MUNICIPALITY CONTRACT SCHOOL TEACHERS (APPOINTMENT AND SERVICES CONDITIONS) RULES, 2001 AS WELL AS RULE 5(8) OF THE MADHYA PRADESH PANCHAYAT SANVIDA SHALA SHIKSHAK (APPOINTMENT AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICES) RULES, 2001 WERE ULTRA VIRES. CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPOINTMENTS WHICH WERE MADE ON THE BASIS OF THE AFORESAID RULES WERE ALSO DIRECTED TO BE RESCRUTINISED AND IF ANY PERSON HAD BEEN APPOINTED AFTER BEING GIVEN THE BENEFIT OF THE RULES WHICH HAD BEEN DECLARED ULTRA VIRES, THE APPOINTMENTS WERE TO BE SET ASIDE. IN THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS FILED BY THE STATE 9 GOVERNMENT AN INTERIM ORDER WAS PASSED ON 10-3-2003 STAYING THE OPERATION OF THE HIGH COURTS ORDER. AS A RESULT, THE PERSONS WHOSE APPOINTMENTS WERE DIRECTED TO BE SET ASIDE BY THE HIGH COURT CONTINUED IN SERVICE. 2. DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS BEFORE THIS COURT THE STATE GOVERNMENT HAS IN FACT AMENDED THE RULES WHICH WERE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE HIGH COURTS DECISION AND BY NOTIFICATIONS DATED 11-7-2003 AND 30-7-2003 BROUGHT THE SAID RULES INTO FORCE WITH EFFECT FROM 14-3-2003. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID, THE APPELLANTS DO NOT WISH TO PERSIST WITH THEIR CHALLENGE TO THE HIGH COURTS ORDER. THE ONLY CLARIFICATION THAT THEY SEEK IS WHETHER THE EXPERIENCE GAINED BY THE APPOINTEES WHO HAD CONTINUED IN SERVICE ON THE BASIS OF THE ORDER OF STAY GRANTED BY THIS COURT, COULD BE CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE MARKING UNDER THE NEW RULES. THE LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE RESPONDENT-WRIT PETITIONERS HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE INITIAL APPOINTMENTS WERE TO THE POST OF SANVIDA SHALA SHIKSHAK (SSS). UNDER RULE 7 OF BOTH RULES, AS UNAMENDED, A PERSON SELECTED AS AN SSS WAS INITIALLY APPOINTED ONLY FOR A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS. DEPENDING UPON THE SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE BY THE SSS, AN SSS COULD BE APPOINTED AGAIN FOR ANOTHER PERIOD OF THREE YEARS ON CONTRACT IN WHICH EVENT "SUCH PERSON ON NEW APPOINTMENT SHALL BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE AN INCREASE OF 15% OF THE CONTRACT AMOUNT". 3. THE NEW RULES DO NOT SPEAK OF ANY RENEWAL BUT RELATE TO THE INITIAL APPOINTMENT OF A PERSON TO THE POST OF SSS. THE NEW RULES ALSO DO NOT GIVE ANY PREFERENTIAL RIGHT TO ANYONE WHO HAS SERVED AS SSS. 3. THE NEW RULES DO NOT SPEAK OF ANY RENEWAL BUT RELATE TO THE INITIAL APPOINTMENT OF A PERSON TO THE POST OF SSS. THE NEW RULES ALSO DO NOT GIVE ANY PREFERENTIAL RIGHT TO ANYONE WHO HAS SERVED AS SSS. ALL TEACHERS IN GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS INCLUDING NON-FORMAL SCHOOLS HAVE BEEN TREATED ON A PAR. THEREFORE, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE NATURE OF THE APPOINTMENT OF THOSE PERSONS APPOINTED PURSUANT TO THE UNAMENDED 2001 RULES, FOR THE PURPOSES OF APPOINTMENT UNDER THE AMENDED RULES, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF ANY RENEWAL OR PREFERENTIAL RIGHT BEING GIVEN. HOWEVER, IF THESE APPOINTEES HAVE SERVED AS TEACHERS WITHIN THE EXPLANATION TO THE AMENDED RULES, THIS FACT CAN BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING THEIR DE FACTO EXPERIENCE WHICH MAYOR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN AS AN SSS. 4. THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS ARE, ACCORDINGLY, DISPOSED OF WITH THE AFORESAID CLARIFICATION. SLPS (C) NOS. CCS NOS. 9775 AND 9776 OF 2003 5. THESE SLPS ARE DELINKED. 6. PERMISSION TO FILE SLP IS GRANTED. 7. ISSUE NOTICE. COURT MASTERS