Delhi HC rejects Çelebi's plea against revoked security clearance

Çelebi's counsel had argued that the action was taken without adhering to due process

The Delhi High Court on Monday rejected a petition filed by Turkish ground handling company Çelebi Airport Services India against the Centre’s decision to revoke its security clearance, reported Bar and Bench.

 

Justice Sachin Datta, who reserved the verdict on May 23, refused to stay the Centre's actions.

 

Çelebi, part of Turkiye-based Çelebi group, provides ground handling and cargo terminal services at nine airports in India. It has been active in the country’s aviation sector for over 15 years and employs more than 10,000 personnel, reported news agency PTI.

 

The Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) revoked the company's security clearance on May 15. The decision came shortly after diplomatic tensions escalated, following Turkey’s criticism of India’s retaliatory actions targeting terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir.

 

In its order, BCAS stated, "... the security clearance in r/o Çelebi Airport Services India Pvt Ltd is hereby revoked with immediate effect in the interest of national security." The clearance had previously been granted in November 2022. 

 

During court proceedings, the Centre defended the revocation, citing a significant risk to aviation security. 'Unprecedented' threats had prompted the decision, the government’s counsel submitted.

 

Çelebi’s counsel, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, argued that the action was taken without adhering to due process. They said the Director General of BCAS should have issued a notice and allowed the company to be heard before taking such a step. The move, they said, was in violation of the principles of natural justice and the procedure outlined in the Aircraft Security Rules.

 

"The notice has to say what is the proposed punishment based on the gravamen of facts. It is not a Carte Blanche. Record reasons in writing, not in your mind," he said, as quoted by Bar and Bench.

 

The Centre, however, maintained that the clearance was withdrawn based on inputs suggesting that continued operations by the company posed a risk in the prevailing circumstances.