1. HIDAYAT HUSSAIN (CHAIRMAN).-The applicant-Union has raised Disputes No. 297/70 and 305/70 under section 34 pending in the Second Sind Labour Court, Karachi, arising out of a settlement which they allege was arrived at between the parties on 19th December 1969. They further allege that as soon as they raised the disputes the respondent-Management started terminating the services of the members of the Union. Through this application, therefore, they pray for temporary injunction restraining the respondent Management from terminating the services of the members of the Union. Ad interim injunction was issued on 14th June 1971. The matter has come up for confirma--tion.
2. Mr. Masood Mirza appears for the respondent-Management and Mr. Sated Pasha Lodhi for the applicants.
3. Contentions of Mr. Masood Mirza are as follows :-
(a) application under section 34 of the I. R. O., 1969 cannot be deemed to be an industrial dispute and, therefore, provisions of Civil Procedure Code will not apply and hence this Court will have no powers to grant temporary injunction.
(b) The order is bad because it covers those employees also whose services had been terminated before the date of the order.
4. Mr. Sated. Pasha Lodhi replies as follows :-
(a) All applications under section 34 have to be deemed to be industrial disputes otherwise sections 32 and 45 of the Ordinance will cease to have any meaning and this Court will cease to have any jurisdiction at all.
(b) The main dispute has been raised by the Union under section 34 and, therefore, this is a dispute or at least difference between the employers and the workmen of the applicant Union.
5. This order will dispose of prayer for temporary injunction only and, therefore, I will not express any opinion on merit. To lose it appears that when an application is preferred by the Union under section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, it will amount to a difference between the workman and the employers although the application concerns the cafes of individual workman and hence the matter will fall within the definition of Industrial dispute. This being the position this Court will apply the Provisions of Civil Procedure Code as far as possible including, the powers of issuing-temporary injunction. In this cage it is on record that the respondent. Management went on termination the services of the employees even after the receipt of notice' in the cases filed against them in this Court. This is, therefore a fit case where temporary injunction issued by this Court on 14th June 1971, may continue and I confirm it. That order will require some modification in view of the submission of Mr. Masood Mirza that it covers those employees also who had been removed before 14th June 1971. It is clarified that the order of temporary injunction will not operate in case of any workman whose services had already been terminated on or before 14th June 1971.