( 1 ) BY means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, concerned workman challenges the award of the labour court, Uttar Pradesh, Kanpur dated 21st june, 1996 passed in Adjudication Case No. 153 of 1991.

( 2 ) THE following dispute was referred to the labour court for adjudication :. . (VERNACULAR MATTER OMMITED ). .

( 3 ) THE parties have exchanged their pleadings and adduced evidence before the labour court. The employer, in their written statement, have categorically stated that they have not terminated the services of the concerned workman and no order terminating the services of the concerned workman was passed. The name of the concerned workman is still on the rolls of the employer. In this view of the matter, the concerned workman is not entitled for any relief.

( 4 ) THE case set up by the concerned workman was that he met with an accident and remained in the hospital and his absence on medical ground was approved by the Employees State Insurance authority till 25th September, 1990. Therefore, he cannot be said to be absent from his duties.

( 5 ) THE employer have replied that from bare reading of the application