Upholding the Union Government’s decision to revoke security clearances of Turkish owned aviation company without prior notice, the Delhi High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea by Çelebi saying the national security considerations can override principles of natural justice.
In a detailed judgment, Justice Sachin Datta sided with the Union Government, holding that national security is an exception to the rule of natural justice, even if not explicitly stated in the Aircraft Security Rules. “No doubt, the principles of natural justice are sacrosanct; however, it is a compelling constitutional truth that security of the realm is the pre-condition for enjoyment of all other rights,” the court said in its 94-page verdict. Once national security considerations are found to be the reasons for the concerned action, the issue as to whether something is or is not in the interest of national security is not a matter for judicial review,” the High Court made it clear.
The court rejected the contention of the petitioners on the denial of principles of natural justice.
The Bureau of Civil Aviation Safety (BCAS) on May 15 revoked the security clearance, days after Turkey backed Pakistan and condemned India’s strikes on terror camps in the neighbouring country.
Justice Sachin Datta on Monday underlined the necessity to eliminate the possibility of espionage or dual use of logistics capabilities which would be highly detrimental to the security of the country, especially in the event of an external conflict.
Celebi Airport Services India Pvt Ltd and Celebi Delhi Cargo Terminal Management India Pvt Ltd oversee ground handling and cargo terminal functions at various airports in the country. The court rejected the contention of the petitioners on the denial of principles of natural justice.
The order said the authorities are justified in taking prompt and definitive action to completely obviate the possibility of the country’s civil aviation and national security being compromised. Ground handling services at airports, the court said, offered deep access to airside operations, aircraft, cargo, passenger information system and 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 added.
“This is particularly true in the wake of contemporary challenges faced by the country in the security domain, and the escalations/ incidents witnessed in the recent past, with geopolitical factors at play,” the verdict said. The court, as a result, found “compelling national security considerations” which prompted authorities to take requisite action against the Turkish firm.
“While it would not be inappropriate for this court to make a verbatim reference to the relevant information/ inputs, suffice it to say, that there is a necessity to eliminate the possibility of espionage and/or dual use of logistics capabilities which would be highly detrimental to the security of the country, especially in the event of an external conflict,” it said.
The court referred to a Supreme Court judgment observing the executive wing and not the judicial wing possessed the knowledge of India’s geo-political relationships to assess if an action is in the interest of India’s national security.
At the same time, the court noted, the Supreme Court clarified that a judicial review would not be excluded on a mere mention of the phrase “national security” and state couldn’t be allowed to use national security as a tool to deny citizens remedies provided under law. The high court was also “acutely conscious” that the state must not be allowed to invoke national security as a ruse to deny procedural due process.
Once national security considerations were found to exist, on the basis of which the security clearance has been cancelled or revoked, it is not for the court to “second guess” the same, the high court said. The verdict found the twin tests set out in an apex court decision to be satisfied in the present case with the state justifying the involvement of national security considerations besides the abrogation of principles of natural justice.
In the context of a ground or cargo handling agency with access to sensitive areas of airports which operates in a sensitive domain, the court said, any national security concerns would inherently necessitate swift executive action. “Any action taken by the Director General of the Bureau of Civil Aviation for the purpose of revocation of any security clearance on the basis of inputs received from the law enforcement/ intelligence agency cannot be considered to be an act inconsistent with the Aircrafts Rules 2023, contrary to what has been contended on behalf of the petitioners,” it said.
Following the May 15 revocation, the Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL) had terminated its contracts with Çelebi. The Turkish firm a wholly-owned Indian subsidiary of Turkish parent company Çelebi Aviation Holding, challenged the move before the High Court shortly after. It said the Centre’s move was against the principles of natural justice and in violation of the procedure under the Aircraft Security Rules. Its counsel said the Director General of Bureau of Civil Aviation Security ought to have given the petitioners a hearing after giving notice of “proposed punishment” and subsequently given reasons for their action.
