JUDGMENT : This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal making adverse observations against the petitioner, in a case filed by the respondent No. 1. The petitioner was not impleaded as a party in the case, and he moved later an application before the Tribunal for expunging the remarks on the ground that they were uncalled for and had been made without any opportunity to him to place his case. The Tribunal dismissed the Application by holding that it has become functus officio and could not deal with the matter any further. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we permit the petitioner to challenge the orders of the Tribunal. Accordingly special leave is granted. 3. The appellant was a superior officer in the department where the respondent No. 1 was officer. A disciplinary proceeding had been started against the respondent and he was suspended pending the enquiry. The respondent No. 1 moved the Tribunal, inter alia, alleging that the disciplinary proceeding had been started against him at the instance of the appellant Mr. Jain. He made several serious allegations against Mr. Jain, which the Tribunal has assumed to be true. Without appreciating that the nature of the allegations made against the appellant were such that only he could have replied to the same, the Tribunal proceeded to examine the matter on merits, and ultimately came to a conclusion in favour of the respondent and accordingly allowed his Application. 4. The learned counsel representing the respondent No. 1 has very strenuously contended that the adverse remarks made by the Tribunal against the appellant are fully justified in view of the records which had been produced before the Tribunal. He also said that as the department had defended the case it must be treated to have represented the appellant before the Tribunal. We do not find any merit in this submission. We have examined the relevant circumstances and in our view the presence of the department before the Tribunal was not sufficient for dispensing with the notice to the appellant. If the allegations against the appellants are so important as to form the basis of the impugned decision of the Tribunal, the entire judgment becomes liable to be set aside on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice. If the allegations against the appellants are so important as to form the basis of the impugned decision of the Tribunal, the entire judgment becomes liable to be set aside on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice. We, in the circumstances, allow this appeal, set aside both the orders of the Tribunal dated 12-7-1991 and 1-10-1991 and remit the case to the Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law. If the Tribunal considers necessary to examine the correctness of the allegations made by the respondent No. 1 against Mr. Jain, it must direct Mr. Jain to be added as a party-respondent, and must give him adequate opportunity to place his case, before proceeding further in the matter. Appeal allowed.