DECISION ' Heard Mr. Muhammad Humayun for the applicant Management and Mr. Ashraf Hussain Rizvi for the respondent.
' Pre-admission notice had been issued in this case for hearing the other side before passing any orders on the Revision Application.
2. Mr. Ashraf Hussain Rizvi has explained that the Management had staged a lock-out and laid off 22 workers which was the total number of workers employed in the factory. For this action permission of the Labour Court had not been obtained and the lock-out and lay off were illegal.
The workers, therefore, filed a petition under section 45 of the I.R.O. For prohibition of lock-out.
Pending the proceedings the Management through Mr. Muhammad Humayun has filed a Revision Application against the order of the Labour Court because an application for dismissal of the plaint under Order 7, Rule 11 was rejected by the Labour Court; the ground urged is that this Interim application under Order 7, Rule 11 should have been granted and this was an illegality committed by the Labour Court. The legal position in this regard has been sufficiently established that Labour COurt is not vested with all the powers of a Civil Court under the Civil Procedure Code but only with procedural powers required for adjudication and determination of industrial dispute. Nor can the Labour Court issue any temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. The Labour Court has no jurisdiction to issue temporary injunction as held in 1981 PLC 737 by the Appellate Tribunal in the case of Abdul Razzak v. Divisional Mechanical Engineer. Under section 36(2) of the I.R.O. Labour Court is deemed to be a Civil Court and can exercise powers vested in the Civil. Court such as enforcing attendance of any person compelling production of documents issuing commissions etc. This clearly shows that the Labour Court can exercise only such procedural powers as per Rule of Interpretaion defined in the Maxwell's Interpretation of Statutes. The other powers not mentioned should be of the same nature or ejusdene generis and it does not mean that the Labour Court can exercise all the powers of Civil Court. It is only the powers falling under a class as enumerated and cannot include the powers under Order 7, Rule 11, C.P.C. Regarding dismissal of plaint under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. Regarding issue of injunction.
3. The Revision Application filed by Mr. Muhammad Humayun, is therefore, not maintainable and is dismissed in limine.