S. K. KESHOTE, J. ( 1 ) HAVING heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and going through the contents of the writ petition, I am satisfied that the proper and effective remedy for the redressal of the grievance of the petitioner was to approach the Labour Court. The petitioner, in fact, approached the Labour Court in 1994, but he has withdrawn his application on 1-1-1996. The application filed by the petitioner before the Labour Court has been withdrawn on the ground that the petitioner seeks to approach this Court. Paragraph (15) of the writ petition reads as under:"the petitioner has filed this issue before the Honble Labour Court at Rajkot in the year of 1994 but some senior co- employees of the petitioner have given some instructions withdraw the application from the Honble Labour Court the petitioner had filed earlier, the petitioner therefore, has withdrawn the application on 1-1-1996. The petitioner submits that the petitioner has given pursis no to the Honble Labour Court in which the petitioner has stated that as the petitioner seeks to approach this Honble Court, the petitioner is withdrawing this application from Labour Court at Rajkot. " ( 2 ) IN the first part of Paragraph (15), the petitioner has stated that some senior co-employee has given some instructions to withdraw the application which the petitioner has filed earlier from the Honble Labour Court. The petitioner has stated that he withdrew the application as he sought to approach this Honble Court. It is not the case of the petitioner in the writ petition that the Labour Court has dismissed the application on the ground that it is not maintainable. It is also not the case of the petitioner that some legal opinion was given to him regarding the maintainability of the application before the Labour Court. Once the petitioner has chosen a particular forum for the redressal of his grievances he should have stuck to it. The petitioner has already availed of an alternative remedy and again at his own sweet will he cannot be permitted to shift to another remedy by approaching this Court, more so, when there are seriously disputed questions of facts on which an inquiry is required to be made. The petitioner has already availed of an alternative remedy and again at his own sweet will he cannot be permitted to shift to another remedy by approaching this Court, more so, when there are seriously disputed questions of facts on which an inquiry is required to be made. The only grievance made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the application has already been withdrawn and in case the writ petition is dismissed, the petitioner will be rendered remedy less and as such he fairly submitted that observations may be made so that the Labour Court may restore the application to its original number. This seems to be a justified prayer. ( 3 ) IN the result, this writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner moves the Labour Court for revival of the application which has been withdrawn by him before the Labour Court concerned, the Labour Court will consider the matter sympathetically and more particularly will consider the fact that this writ petition was dismissed on the ground that alternative remedy has been availed of. .