petitioner for above act and on the basis of the same he was served with a chargesheet under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (for short ‘the Rules of 1958’). Counsel submits that in all three charges were levelled against the petitioner but all the three charges were not found to be proved and finally he was exonerated from all the charges vide order dated 19.12.2001. Counsel submits that in the meantime the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur allowed the claim petition filed by the claimants vide judgment and award dated 31.05.2006 and directed the State respondents to pay compensation of Rs.65,200/- along with interest @6% per annum to the claimants. Counsel submits that on the basis of the aforesaid judgment again the petitioner was served with chargesheet under Rule 17 of the Rules of 1958 and finally he was punished vide impugned order dated 11.05.2007 and recovery orders of Rs.81601/- were passed against the petitioner. Counsel submits that issuance of subsequent chargesheet under Rule 17 of the Rules of 1958 amounts to double jeopardy as the same charges were levelled against the petitioner for same incident under Rule 16 of the Rules of 1958 wherein he was exonerated from all the charges on 19.12.2001. Counsel further submits that the petitioner was acquitted in the criminal case and the charges of rash and negligent driving were not found to be proved against him, that is why he was exonerated in the earlier chargesheet. Counsel submits that the petitioner was driving the vehicle of the State in the capacity of employee so there was vicarious liability of State to pay compensation to the claimants in case the vehicle of the State met with an accident. Counsel submits that under these
