S. N. Srivastava, J.—This writ petition is directed against the order dated 27th July, 2004, passed by the District Judge, Gorakhpur.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner urged that impugned order was passed behind the back of petitioner without any application of the parties. Deputy Commissioner (Adminis-tration), Trade Tax, Gorakhpur at whose behest impugned order was passed is neither plaintiff nor defendant. The District Judge, Gorakhpur erred in law, acted illegally without jurisdiction and passed impugned order even without affording any opportunity of hearing to opposite party and prayed to quash impugned order.

3. In reply to the same, learned standing counsel urged that impugned order was passed in accordance with law.

4. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned standing counsel and perused the record.

5. Rules 28 to 33 of Chapter III of General Rules Civil relates to entertaining applications in the civil court which make clear that applications may be presented to Munsarim of the Court which could be received on any day other than an authorized holiday between 10-30 a.m. and such hour as may be fixed by the Court ; provided that an application or petition presented after such hour and before 4 p.m. may be received on the ground, if any, of limitation or other urgent reason. Every application shall at the time of presentation bear the name and also full signature or thumb-mark of the person actually presenting the same together with the date of presentation and no application shall be received from any person other than party himself, his pleader or his recognized agent as required under Chapter XXV or by a registered clerk of pleader registered under Chapter V of General Rules Civil. In case any application is received by post, it shall be returned to sender to be presented according to law.

6. Relevant Rules 29 and 30 of General Rules Civil are being reproduced below :

“29. Persons from whom applications may be received.—Except an application for a copy, no application or petition and no pleading required or authorised by law to be made by a party in Court, shall be received from any person other than the party himself, his pleader, or his recognized agent (see Order III, Rules 1 and 2).

Registered clerks of pleaders, as such, can present only such applications as they are authorised to present by the rules given in Chapter XXV of these rules.

30. How to deal with applications received by post.—An application or petition, not being an application for a copy, received through post shall be returned to sender with a note that it should be presented according to law, provided that necessary postage stamps have been received with such application or petition ; otherwise it shall be filed in a file book.”

7. From perusal of the record it transpires that Deputy Commissioner (Administration), Trade Tax, Gorakhpur (who is not party to the proceeding) sent some letter to District Judge, Gorakhpur, without complying provisions of General Rules Civil and District Judge by an order dated 27.7.2004 transferred Suit Nos. 259 of 2002 and 22 of 2000 to the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.). Provisions of Rules 27 to 33 were not complied with. No application was moved by Deputy Commissioner (Adminis-tration), Trade Tax, Gorakhpur, in accordance with law. No court fee was paid on this letter to transfer the suit. A letter cannot be treated to be an application in a suit. Parties were also not heard. Under C.P.C. District Judge is empowered to transfer any case suo motu but once an application is received for transfer on certain allegation, order for transfer could be passed only after opportunity to opposite party and not suo motu exercising general power of transfer. It was, therefore, necessary in the interest of justice for the District Judge to pass order on transfer application and only after due notice to opposite party.

8. Section 24 (1) of C.P.C. is relevant for the purposes of the case, same is being reproduced below :

“