JUDGMENT Hon’ble Vivek Chaudhary, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Petitioner was appointed as a L.T. grade teacher in Navyug Kanya Vidyalaya Inter College, Lucknow on 18.8.1990. Her appointment was approved by the District Inspector of Schools on 16.8.1990 and thereafter she was regularized by order dated 8.4.1995 w.e.f. 7.8.1993. There accrued a substantive vacancy in the Lecturer post on 30.6.1997 due to retirement of a Lecturer. Petitioner being the senior most teacher and having completed more than five years of service was qualified for being promoted as Lecturer. However, the same was refused by order dated 20.8.2001. In the impugned order the District Inspector of Schools states that as per Chapter-II Regulation 6 (1) of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 the petitioner is not having qualification for minimum five years regular service. 3. Petitioner’s submission is that law is settled by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Raeesul Hasan v. State of U.P., 2015(6) ADJ 778 (LB)(FB) : 2015(3) ESC 1764 (All)(LB)(FB), wherein this Court has held “we answer the reference by holding that it is not the date on which the vacancy has occurred, but the year of recruitment is relevant for determination of eligibility for promotion to the Lecturer under Rules 1998”. Petitioner claims that the Rules of 1998 are same and there is no difference in Rules of 1995. 4. Admittedly, after coming into force the Rules of 1995 the field is occupied by Rule 14 and is no more occupied by Regulations of Intermediate Education Act. Rule 14 provides as under : “14. Procedure for recruitment by promotion.—(1) Where any vacancy is to be filled by promotion all teachers working in trained graduates (L.T.) grade or Certificate of Teaching (C.T.) grade, if any, who possess the qualifications prescribed for the post and have completed five years continuous service as such on the first day of the year of recruitment shall be considered for promotion to the lecturers grade or the trained graduates (L.T.) grade, as the case may be, without their having applied for the same.” On bare perusal of the said rules, it is clear that what is required within completed five years service and not “regular service”. 5. In view of aforesaid, the impugned order as passed cannot be sustained. The same has been passed relying upon the wrong provisions of law. 5. In view of aforesaid, the impugned order as passed cannot be sustained. The same has been passed relying upon the wrong provisions of law. Therefore, order dated 20.8.2001 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Lucknow is set aside. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits.