JUDGMENT :

NAMIT KUMAR, J. 

1. The instant Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant/plaintiff impugning the judgment and decree passed by the learned First Appellate Court dated 28.01.1998, whereby the judgment and decree dated 21.04.1995 passed by the learned Trial Court has been set aside and the suit of the appellant/plaintiff has been dismissed. Parties to the lis hereinafter shall be referred to by their original position before the learned Trial Court.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff was working as Assistant Superintendent and was posted with the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana. With effect from 01.07.1977, he was assigned the duties of the higher post of Superintendent, which he continued to discharge upto 06.09.1987. He was thereafter promoted on regular basis to the post of Superintendent with effect from 07.09.1987 and retired as such on 30.09.1988. Subsequently, he instituted a civil suit claiming the pay scale attached to the post of Superintendent from 01.07.1977 to 06.09.1987, which was decreed by the learned Trial Court, vide its judgment dated 21.04.1995 by recording the following findings :-

“ Issues No.1, 2 & 3

6. All these issues are inter connected and can be discussed together, conveniently. There is no dispute between the parties that the plaintiff joined the Municipal Committee in the year 1946. There is hardly any dispute between the parties that he retired from the service of Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana on 30.09.1988 as Superintendent. Desraj plaintiff when appeared as (PW5) stated that he started performing the duties of Superintendent with effect from 01.07.1977 and continued performing the same till his retirement on 30.09.1988. He further stated that he worked as Superintendent from 01.07.1977 to 30.09.1988 but was not paid the salary and allowances of the post of Superintendent from 01.07.1977 to 06.09.1987. On the other hand, he was paid the salary and allowances of the post of Assistant Superintendent though he worked as Superintendent. Ex. P4 is a copy of the note which was put up by the establishment Superintendent M.C. Ludhiana. In this note, it was clearly stated by the establishment Superintendent that as per the report of the Senior Accounts Officer, the plaintiff worked as Superintendent from 01.07.1977 to 30.09.1988 in his own pay scale as Assistant Superintendent. It was further stated in this note that since the post of Superintendent was lying vacant, the claim of Desraj Prabhakar, plaintiff regarding the pay and allowances attached to the post of Superintendent for the period in question was genuine. During the period 01.07.1977 to 30.09.1988 the post of Superintendent was lying vacant in the M.C. Ludhiana as is evident from the reply to interrogatories submitted by the defend-ants. Ex.P7 to Ex.P11 are the copies of establishment check register, prepared by the officials of the Municipal Corporation on the basis of record maintained in the regular course of its business. These documents were duly proved through the evidence of Bodh Raj (PW2) and Tarsem Lal Junior Assistant, M.C. (PW3) Ex.P7 is a copy of the establishment check register for the year 1983-84. It is mentioned therein that Des Raj plaintiff was promoted as Octroi Superintendent in the leave vacancy of Harchand Singh. Ex.P5 is a copy of the establishment check register for the year 1984-85- It is evident from this copy that order No.215 dated 31.07.1984 with effect from 01.08.1984 Desraj joined the duty as Superintendent against the post of Pran Nath, Superintendent Ex P9 is a copy of the establishment check register for the year 1985-86. According to this document, Desraj Prabhakar was shown to be posted as Octroi Superintendent grade 1. Ex.P10 is a copy of the establishment check register, for the year 1986-87 according to which the the plaintiff was shown to be posted as Octroi Superintendent. Ex.P11 is a copy of the estab-lishment check register according to which the plaintiff was sh