1994 PLP 597 (PLC)

6. It was very clearly mentioned in the written statement that the seniority of the staff had not been revised yet, but only certain clarifications had been made in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court. This is what was deposed to by the respondent's witness Abdul Ghani, Abdul Razzak one of the appellants in his cross‑examination had also stated that the seniority list was under preparation and he did not know whether the same had been issued. Karim Bux is more forthright, and has admitted that there is no letter received regarding the change of seniority. So, it cannot be said that anybody is hurt. The position, therefore, is that there is nothing beyond a threat or portent, looming large over the heads of the appellants but there is no real cause of grievance to them as nobody's rights have been affected one way or the other. In short the petition is premature. That by itself is enough to dispose of the appeal but there is something more to it.

7. The relief sought by the petitioners is that the respondent should be restrained from implementing the policy dated 11‑3‑1987.

8. The powers of the Labour Court are, to be found in section 35(5) of the IRO which reads as under:‑‑ "(5) A Labour Court shall‑‑ (a) adjudicate and determine as industrial dispute which has been referred to or brought before it under this Ordinance, (b) enquire into and adjudicate any matter relating to the. Implementation or violation of a settlement which is referred to it by the Provincial Government, (c) try offences under this Ordinance, (and such other offences under any other law as the Provincial Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, specify in this behalf.), (d) exercise and perform such other powers and functions as are or may be conferred upon or assigned to it by or under this Ordinance (or any other law). And the procedure of the Court is to be found in section 36 which reads as under:‑‑

36. Procedure and Powers of Labour Court.‑‑ (1) ......................................................................... (2) A Labour Court shall, for the purpose of adjudicating and determining any industrial dispute, be deemed to be a Civil Court and shall have the same powers as are vested in such Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act V of 1908) including the powers of: (a) enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath, (b) compelling the production of documents and material objects, and (c) issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents. (3) ............................................................. (4) ............................................................. (5) .............................................................

9. These provisions do not bestow the powers of granting injunction to I the Labour Court. Support is to be found for the said proposition from a judgment of the Division Bench of the Sindh High Court namely Brooke Bond Pakistan Limited v. 2nd Labour Court, Karachi 1973 PLC 111 in which the interim order of the Tribunal in an application under section 34, I.R.O. praying in substance, for a declaration that the petitioner be continued to be employed by the management, had been challenged. The Bench consisted of Tufail Ali Abdul Rehman, C.J., and Fakhruddin G. Ibrahim, J. and the judgment was delivered by the Chief Justice, wherein it was observed as under:‑‑ "I am, therefore, of the view that subsection (2) does not confer upon a Labour Court, while adjudicating and determining an industrial dispute, all the powers of a Civil Court under the Civil Procedure Code but only such of them as may be described as procedural, i.e. such as are required `for the purpose' of adjudication and determination. Now, it is clearly not necessary in order to be able to adjudicate or determining a dispute, that pending the adjudication determination, a party be restrained from giving effect to the kind of the order of which respondent No. 2 complained to the Labour Court." I am of the opinion that there is, no merit in this appeal. I will therefore, uphold the order and dismiss the appeal. H.B.T./2311/Lb.S Appeal dismissed.