New Delhi: The Delhi High Court Monday dismissed a plea by Turkish ground-handling firm Celebi Aviation challenging the Centre’s revocation of its security clearance, citing concerns about potential espionage, dual-use risks and broader national security considerations amid geopolitical tensions.
The revocation, issued by the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security in May, came in the wake of the flare-up of tensions between India and Pakistan, and Turkey’s military support to Pakistan.
The Turkish company had approached the high court, terming the revocation as “arbitrary”, “unreasoned” and a violation of the principles of natural justice as it wasn’t given a show-cause notice or an opportunity to be heard.
Justice Sachin Datta said the court had examined classified material submitted in a sealed cover, and found “compelling national security considerations” that justified the government’s action.
“It would not be appropriate for the court to second-guess such decisions,” the court said in its 7 July ruling. “On perusal of the relevant inputs/information, it indeed transpires that there are compelling national security considerations involved, which impelled the respondents to take impugned action.”
The court said, although it would not be appropriate to disclose the relevant information it was privy to, it did acknowledge the need to eliminate the possibility of espionage, which could be highly detrimental to the country, in case of an external conflict.
“Suffice it also to say, that there are impelling geo-political considerations, impinging upon the safety of the country, which are also involved,” the court said.
The high court justified the Centre’s decision to revoke security clearance, saying ground handling services at airports offer deep access to operations, cargo and passenger information as well as security zones.
“Such unbridled access to vital installations and infrastructure naturally elevates the need for strict security vetting for operators, and their foreign affiliations,” it said.
Citing recent escalations, security incidents and broader geopolitical challenges, the court said that the Centre’s action was consistent with judicially evolved principles recognised across jurisdictions, which prioritise legitimate national security considerations over procedural due process when necessary.
The court also noted that the central government had submitted its reasons for revoking clearance in a sealed cover, in a bid to safeguard sensitive and classified information.
“As far as accepting the report of the concerned agency in a sealed cover is concerned, this Court finds that resorting to any other less restrictive means was not possible in the facts and circumstances of the present case,” it said.
Emphasising the “highly sensitive nature of the material”, the court said that there is no scope to exclude it from consideration or share its contents with Celebi, or even an amicus curiae.
Also Read: Patanjali chyawanprash ad row: Disparaging rival’s product completely impermissible, says Delhi HC
The revocation & how Celebi challenged it
India’s aviation security regulator, the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS), revoked the security clearance given to Celebi’s Indian arm, Celebi Airport Services India, in May on grounds of national security. It came amid the backlash in India over Turkey’s support to Pakistan during the armed conflict with Pakistan following Operation Sindoor.
Arguing that the Centre cannot breach its own rules, Celebi told the Delhi High Court that no reasons were given to it in writing as to why its security clearance was revoked. “Why have you banned me? Why have you banned my business? They have chosen not to share. Instead, they have chucked me out with a mere two-line order,” said senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who was appearing on behalf of the Turkish company. He added that Celebi has worked in the country without a blemish for the past 17 years.
“I am only arguing on the basis of what we read in the newspapers because we know nothing else…nothing has been shared with us,” he further said, adding that the court cannot decide unless the company is supplied with the details.
The purpose of coming to court under Article 226 is to seek “justice”, Rohatgi said, while adding, “Justice cannot be that one officer writes two lines and man’s business is over.”
He said Celebi’s operations were based on the security clearance from the government, which enabled it to partner with multiple parties.
Rohatgi added that the government’s decision has impacted all of Celebi’s contracts with five airport operators across India—Delhi, Cochin, Hyderabad, Goa and Bengaluru. “One by one, my contracts with these operators are being cancelled,” he told the court.
Rohatgi cited the Supreme Court’s 2023 verdict in which it had struck down the Centre’s telecast ban on Malayalam news channel MediaOne on the grounds of national security.
At the time, the apex court had strongly criticised the government, saying “sealed cover proceedings infringe the principles of natural justice and open justice”.
Centre’s defence
The Centre told the court that it was dealing with a “peculiar situation” where there is a threat to airport security at various Indian airports and this cannot be taken lightly.
Highlighting the urgency of the decision, the Centre said any delay could defeat the objective of the action. It, therefore, invoked the principle of plenary or absolute powers or the complete and unlimited powers granted to a body or individual to make decisions or act on a specific issue.
Recalling the 2014 SC ruling in Ex. Armymen’s Protection Services vs. Union of India, the Centre argued that principles of natural justice need not be followed in matters of national security. It added that national security is a policy issue and not a matter of judicial discretion.
(Edited by Sugita Katyal)
Also Read: Delhi HC upholds Centre’s decision to revoke Turkish firm, Celebi’s security clearance