The short, but interesting question required to be decided in this case is whether a Lecturer working in a private college affiliated to a statutory University can be suspended from service for marrying a lady, for the reason that he is a priest. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the case are the following.

2. The petitioner was appointed Lecturer in English by Ext.P1 order dated 20.09.1994 in Devamatha College, Kuravilangad, by the 1st respondent Manager. The said college is a private college affiliated to the Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam. He completed his probation and is now, a regular Lecturer in English in the college. While so, the petitioner was suspended from service by Ext.P2 order dated 27.08.2002. The said order reads as follows:-

"I have been informed that at present you are leading a scandalous life, causing scandal to the students of the College. This is a matter which requires a detailed inquiry. Your presence in the College may affect a fair and impartial inquiry.

In the circumstances, you are hereby placed under suspension from the service of the College until further orders.

During the period of suspension you will be eligible for subsistence allowance as per rules."

On receipt of the said order, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 representation before the Manager denying the allegations raised against him. In the said representation, it is submitted, inter alia, that "being a priest and teacher I am leading a pious, moral and disciplined life. I may also state that I did not commit any offence or any violation of the provisions of the university law." The petitioner submits, the reason for his suspension is that he relinquished his faith in the Catholic Church, embraced the Orthodox Syrian Church and got married to Ms.Hima Jacob (Mary Seena), D/o.Mr. Jacob and Mrs.Mariamma, Nirvruthi Bhavan, Aluva, Ernakulam at the St.Mary's Orthodox Syrian Chapel, Mannuthy, Thrissur according to the rites of the Orthodox Syrian Church on 18.08.2002. The petitioner submits that he is being suspended for changing his faith and for getting married. So, he challenges Ext.P2 on various grounds.

3. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit supporting the impugned order. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit dealing with the contentions in the said counter affidavit.

4. I heard both sides. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the suspension order is illegal, ultra vires and vitiated by malafides. The petitioner has not committed any offence. Religious intolerance, narrow mindedness and prejudice of the 1st respondent are the reasons for the suspension, it is submitted. It is a religious persecution, it is asserted. According to him, it violates his fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 25(1) of the Constitution of India. His right to freedom of conscience is infringed. The petitioner also submitted that he has not committed any misconduct warranting disciplinary action. None of the provisions of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act or the Statutes framed thereunder enables the Management to take disciplinary action against the petitioner for changing his religious faith or for getting married, it is contended.

5. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent would submit that the petitioner has been suspended not for changing his faith, but for getting married and leading a married life. A priest, it is contended, whether he belongs to the Catholic Church or the Malaknara Syrian Orthodox Church, is not entitled to get married or lead a married life. According to him, the marriage itself is invalid. Leading a married life by a priest is scandalous and therefore he is suspended, it is asserted.

6. I heard the learned Standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the 3rd respondent. It is a fundamental principle of law that a man can be punished only for violation of law. So, before going into the validity of Ext.P2, it is profi