Appeal No 4541 of 1991
From the Judgment and Order dated 681991 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No 2415 of 1991
Dr Anand Prakash Mrs Veena Birbal and Raj Birbal for the Appellants
DR Sehgal SK Bagga and Mrs SK Bagga for the Respond ents
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VERMA J
The respondent Jagjit Singh Mehta is em ployed at present in the Bank of India as an officer in Junior Management Grade Scale 1 and posted in a Branch Office of the Bank in District Giridih in the State of Bihar
The respondent was earlier employed in the clerical cadre of the Bank and was posted at Chandigarh
According to the policy contained in Annexure B read with notice dated March 28 1988 Annexure C on promotion from the clerical cadre to the Officers  Grade the respondent had to indicate his preparedness for posting anywhere in India according to the availability of vacancies
The respondent readily indi cated his preparedness to be posted anywhere in India by Annexure D dated April 19 1988 when the respondent was posted as a Clerk at Chandigarh prior to his promotion as an Officer
After getting the promotion as an officer and being posted in Bihar on the above basis the petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition No 2415 of 1991 in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana for a direction to the Bank to transfer him from the Bihar Zone to the Chandigarh Zone on the ground that his wife is employed as a Senior Accountant at Chandi garh
The writ petition has been allowed by a Division Bench MR Agnihotri  DSMehra JJ of the High Court by a cryptic order dated 681991 which reads as under  After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we allow this petition and direct the respondents by issuing a writ of mandamus commanding the Bank of India to transfer the peti 495 tioner and post him somewhere near Chandigarh as his wife is posted as a Clerk in the office of the Advocate General Punjab Chandigarh
This shall be done within a period of two months
No costs
 The petitioner Bank of India is aggrieved by the above order of the High Court
Special leave is granted
In the face of Regulation 47 of the Bank of India Officers  Service Regulations 1979 according to which every officer is liable for transfer to any office or branch of the Bank of India or to any place in India and the clear provision for such a transfer in the policy Annexure B read with notice dated March 28 1988 Annexure C it is difficult to sustain the High Court s order
However learned counsel for the respondent placed reliance on para 4 vi of a Memorandum dated April 3 1986 AnnexureH of the Government of India containing guidelines for posting of husband and wife at one station which are meant to be fol lowed also by all the Public Sector Undertakings
Learned counsel urged that according to the statutory provisions contained in the and the Bank of India Officers  Service Regulations 1979 made thereunder the Bank is bound to follow the guidelines and directions issued by the Cen tral Government in this behalf
There can be no doubt that ordinarily and as far as practicable the husband and wife who are both employed should be posted at the same station even if their employers be different
The desirability of such a course is obvious
However this does not mean that their place of posting should invariably be one of their choice even though their preference may be taken into account while making the deci sion in accordance with the administrative needs
In the case of All India Services the hardship resulting from the two being posted at different stations may be unavoidable at times particularly when they belong to different services and one of them cannot be transferred to the place of the other s posting
While choosing the career and a particular service the couple have to bear in mind this factor and be prepared to face such a hardship if the administrative needs and transfer policy do not permit the posting of both at one place without sacrifice of the requirements of the adminis tration and needs of other employees
In such a case the couple have to make their choice at the threshold between career prospects and family life
After giving preference to the career prospects by accepting such a promotion or any appointment in an All India Service with the incident of transfer to any place in India subordinating the need of the couple living together at one 496 station they cannot as of right claim to be relieved of the ordinary incidents of All India Service and avoid transfer to a different place on the ground that the spouses thereby would be posted at different places
In addition in the present case the respondent voluntarily gave an undertaking that he was
prepared to be posted at any place in India and on that basis got promotion from the clerical cadre to the Officers  grade and thereafter he seeks to be relieved of that necessary incident of All India Service on the ground that his wife has to remain at Chandigarh
No doubt the guidelines require the two spouses to be posted at one place as far as practicable but that does not enable any spouse to claim such a posting as of right if the departmental authorities do not consider it feasible
The only thing required is that the departmental authorities should consid er this aspect along with the exigencies of administration and enable the two spouses to live together at one station if it is possible without any detriment to the administra tive needs and the claim of other employees
The High Court was in error in overlooking all the relevant aspects as well as the absence of any legal fight in the respondent to claim the relief which the High Court has granted as a matter of course
The High Court s order must therefore be set aside
Consequently the appeal is allowed the impugned order of the High Court is set aside and the respondent s writ petition is dismissed
No costs
P Appeal allowed


Summary:
The then Satguru of the appellant Creed was assessed for the assessment years 1937 38 1938 39 for the first time
He was a retired Govt
servant
His pension as well as the income from the institution were assessed together
On appeal the Assistant Commissioner of Income tax confirmed the assessments made by the Income tax Officer
The Income tax Commissioner under reference made under section 662 of the Income tax Act 1922 held that the offerings made to the assessee Satguru were offerings as held in trust and same were exempted under section 431 of the Act
When an application under Section 35 of the Act was made for ratification whether the offerings received by the assessee consisted of interest income property income and income derived from sale of books and photographs etc
to be excluded the Commissioner directed deletion thereof
For the year 1939 40 though the Income tax Officer did not allow exemption us431 of the Act the Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed exemption
Till 1963 64 the appellant was not taxed and its refund applications were accepted by the respondent Revenue
For the assessment years 1964 65 1965 66 1966 67 1967 68 1968 69 1969 70 the assessee appellant was as sessed treating it to be an association of persons and held that the donations and contributions received volun tarily had limited religious use
When the appellant assesses appealed the appellate authority upheld the assessments
313 Against the orders of the Appellate authority the asses see appealed before the Income tax Tribunal
The Tribunal allowing the appeals of the assessee held that the assessee was entitled to the exemption claimed under Section 11 of the Income tax Act 1961
On the question referred to the High Court by the Tribunal Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in holding that the income derived by the Radha Swami Satsang a religious institution was entitled to exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act 1961 the High Court answered the question in favour of the Revenuerespondent holding that the trust deed was revocable and the conditions for exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act were not satisfied
Allowing the appeals of the assessee this Court HELD 101
Assessments are quasi judicial
Each assess ment year being a unit what is decided in one year may not apply in the following year but where a fundamental aspect permeating through the different assessment years has been found as a fact one way or the other and parties have al lowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order it would not be at all appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year
320H 321 A B 102
No formal document is necessary to create a trust
The conditions which have to be satisfied to entitled one for exemption are a the property from which the income is derived should be held under trust or legal obli gation b the property should be so held for charitable or religious purposes which enure for the benefit of the pub lic
317 E G 103
The property was given to the Satguru for the common purpose of furthering the objects of the Sat Guru
The property was therefore subject to a legal liability of being used for the religious or charitable purpose of the Satsang
319 E F 104
The Tribunal was justified in holding that the income derived by the Radhasoami Satsang was entitled to exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act 1961
321 D Patel Chhotahhai and Ors
Janan Chandra Bask and Ors AIR 314 1935 Privy Council 97 Acharya Jagdish Waranand Avadhuta  Ors
vs Commissioner of Police Calcutta  Ant  The Secretary of State for India in Council vs Radha Swami Sat Sang  All India Spinners Associ ation vs Commissioner of Income Tax Bombay  TMM Sankaralinga Nadar  Bros  Ors
vs Commissioner of Income tax Madras  Hoystead  Ors
vs Commis sioner of Taxation and Parashuram Pottery Works Co Ltd vs Income tax Officer Circle 1 Ward A Rajkot at p10 referred to