Honble SHETHNA, J.–Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant petitioner mainly on the ground that the earlier writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn without any liberty to file fresh petition. Therefore, on 12.8.1998 we asked Mr. Kothari, learned counsel for the appellant to produce the said order alongwith the copy of the earlier writ petition which he was not at that time. At his request, the matter was placed for further orders today i.e. 25.8.1998. (2). Today, Mr. Kothari has produced the earlier writ petition for our perusal. The prayer made in the writ petition was more or less the same, therefore, in our opinion the appeal was required to be dismissed and the view taken by the learned Single Judge was required to be confirmed. However, Mr. Kothari has cited an order dated 23.10.1996 passed in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.760/95 passed by the Division Bench of this Court referring the matter to the larger Bench on the point as to whether the decision in Sargujas Transport Service case would operate as an absolute bar or not against entertainment of any subsequent writ petition when an earlier petition has been withdrawn without liberty to file a fresh petition and in no circumstances a second petition can be entertained by the High Court on the same subject matter. (3). On the basis of aforesaid order passed by Division Bench, Mr. Kothari submitted that this Court should also refer this matter to the larger bench. In Sargujas Transport Services Case vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal (1) the Honble Supreme Court has clearly held that fresh petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in respect of same cause of action is not maintainable. If that was the only Judgment of the Apex Court which has been referred by the Division Bench of this Court by the aforesaid order to the larger Bench, perhaps we would have referred this matter to the larger bench. But, there is latest judgment of the Honble Apex Court in case of Avinash Nagra vs. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti & Ors. But, there is latest judgment of the Honble Apex Court in case of Avinash Nagra vs. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti & Ors. (2), where in , it has been specifically held that,`` where the first writ petition challeng- ing the order of termination of services was withdrawn without grant of liberty by the Court to file a second writ petition, the second writ petition for that very purpose is barred by principle of constructive res judicata, therefore, not maintainable. This later Judgment of the Supreme Court in Avinash Nagras Case (Supra) was not there when the Division Bench referred the matter to the larger bench. We are bound by the Apex Court Judgments, therefore, we do not think it necessary to refer the matter to the larger bench. (4). In view of the above discussion, we do not find any substance or merit in this special appeal. We fully agree with the view taken by the learned Single Judge that having withdrawn the earlier writ petition without any liberty to file fresh peti- tion the subsequent writ petition is barred by principle of constructive res-judicate, therefore, writ petition was liable to be dismissed. (5). Accordingly, this special appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.