In *State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati, AIR 1962 SC 933*, what was the holding of the Supreme Court on the State's vicarious liability for the negligent driving of a jeep owned by the State?

1. In **State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati, AIR 1962 SC 933**, the driver of a jeep owned and maintained by the State for the official use of the Collector drove it rashly and negligently and fatally knocked down a pedestrian. 2. The Supreme Court held that **the State was vicariously liable** for damages caused by the negligence of the driver. The decision introduced an important qualification on State immunity in tort based on the doctrines of sovereign and non-sovereign functions. 3. It decided that the **immunity for State action can only be claimed if the act in question was done in the course of the exercise of sovereign functions**. 4. The earlier *P. and O. Steam Navigation v. Secretary of State for India* (5 Bom HCR App 1) had drawn the original sovereign / non-sovereign distinction; *Vidyawati* sharpened the rule on State liability for non-sovereign acts. _Source: ICSI CS Executive — Lesson 5, 'Suit against State in Torts — State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati', p. 130._