1. The petitioner has questioned the initiation of second enquiry against him by the medium of present writ petition. 2. Precisely the case of the petitioner is that he filed a writ petition being SWP No. 949 of 2000 challenging therein his termination order. The writ petition was allowed and the order of termination, impugned, therein, was quashed. 3. Thereafter petitioner was reinstated and Respondent-Irrigation and Flood Control Department was asked to hold enquiry against the petitioner in terms of Govt. Order No. 732-GAD of 2008 dated 29th May, 2008-Annexure-E. Enquiry was conducted and petitioner was exonerated vide Report No. 196 dated 7th April, 2009-Annexure G. It is apt to reproduce last paragraph of the said report herein:- "After conducting the detailed enquiry it has been observed that nothing has been found adverse recorded in the service records of the Junior Engineer by any officer under whom the Junior Engineer has worked during his service tenure and regular annual increments have also been released to him annually, so far as his dismissal is concerned it relates to criminal charges leveled against the Junior Engineer. The Junior Engineer has been absolved from the charges by the Hon'ble court, on which his re-instatement was ordered, the undersigned does not want to comment upon the said issue. The report is submitted for further necessary action." The respondents thereafter desired initiation of second enquiry in terms of annexure J which is subject matter of the instant writ petition. The moot point for consideration is as to whether the second enquiry was warranted under law? Admittedly termination order was quashed with liberty to respondents to conduct enquiry which was ordered in terms of order dated 29th May, 2008 and the same was concluded as not proved against the petitioner in terms of Annexure G and under what provisions of law the respondents have drawn another enquiry is not forthcoming. It is profitable to make mention herein, that petitioner was facing criminal trial before the competent court of jurisdiction and has been honourably acquitted after full dressed trial. This court in the very recent past, in case titled Khurshid Ahmad Shah v. State and others bearing SWP No. 852 of 2008, of which per chance I am the author, has held it impermissible to initiate second enquiry against the official on the same charges of which he stands exonerated in the earlier enquiry. This court in the very recent past, in case titled Khurshid Ahmad Shah v. State and others bearing SWP No. 852 of 2008, of which per chance I am the author, has held it impermissible to initiate second enquiry against the official on the same charges of which he stands exonerated in the earlier enquiry. The Apex Court in case reported as 2012 AIR SCW 1791 titled Nand Kumar Verma v. State of Jharkhand and others has taken the same view. Having regard to the above discussion, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed as such quashing the impugned order-Annexu re J. Disposed of.