' This is a revision reporting that the order dated 6-1-1987 recorded by the learned Labor Court No,9, Multan, whereby the application for ad interim injunction was dismissed is wrong and of no legal effect.
2. The petitioners are Checkers. They have been stopped from discharging the duties of checking and have been made to work in the office. They have challenged this order on the ground of mala fide in their grievance petition brought under section 25-A, I.R.O., 1969 and made application for ad-interim injunction to the effect that the respondent be directed to allow them to discharge their duties as Checkers The learned Labour Court has dismissed the application on the ground that the petitioners have failed to show that they have a prima facie there appears to be infringement of no right guaranteed by any law, settlement or award. Order 12, clause (3) relates to termination of service but the petitioners have not been removed from service. It has not been shown that there is any settlement or award to the effect that workers cannot be stopped from discharging their duties. Since the petitioners are still Checkers and wages as much are being paid to them, they cannot be said to be aggrieved persons. It has been argued that fixed TA. DA. Is given to the Checkers if they perform the duties of checking which they are losing. TA./DA. Cannot be characterized as wages. They are paid TA./DA. To defray the expenses of travelling. Since no right guaranteed by any law, settlement or award appears to have been infringed the learned Labour Court has rightly held that the petitioners have no prima facie case. There is no scope to interfere with the impugned order
3. As a result the revision fails and is dismissed.