The Delhi High Court, on Monday, emphasized the importance of prioritizing national security over procedural concerns, as it heard a petition from Turkey-based Celebi Airport Services India Pvt Ltd challenging the cancellation of its security clearance.

The Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) had revoked Celebi’s clearance on May 15, shortly after Turkey publicly supported Pakistan and denounced India’s military actions targeting terror camps across the border, including in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The company had initially been granted clearance in November 2022.

Justice Sachin Datta, hearing the matter, responded to Celebi’s counsel—senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi—by stating, “It is better to be safe than sorry.” The comment came amid Celebi’s argument that the decision was unfair, lacking transparency and without prior notice.

Rohatgi contended that Celebi, which employs over 10,000 people and operates in nine airports across India, had been unfairly penalized based on assumptions related to its Turkish ownership. He asserted the company had built a strong operational history over 17 years and stressed, “You can’t upend my business with a two-line communication.”

He further argued that no reasons had been provided for the decision, nor was Celebi given an opportunity to respond before the clearance was withdrawn.

In response, the court observed that issuing a prior notice in such cases might risk undermining national interests. “A heads-up could prompt the very risk security agencies are trying to prevent,” it said.

Representing the central government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended the move, highlighting the sensitive nature of civil aviation operations. He emphasized that entities operating at airports have access to intricate and strategic areas, making their roles critical from a security standpoint.

“Security clearances are a sovereign function,” Mehta noted, adding that the Ministry of Civil Aviation holds the authority to grant or revoke them without the need for detailed justifications, especially when national security is concerned.

He cautioned against applying the legal doctrine of proportionality in such cases, stressing, “The threat only needs to succeed once, but our agencies must succeed every single time.”

Rohatgi’s argument that the company’s Indian employees manage the ground operations was countered with a reminder that ultimate control and instructions stem from the foreign owners.

The court has adjourned the hearing to May 21 and asked the government to clarify under which specific legal provisions the revocation was made.

In its petition, Celebi claimed that the revocation was based on ambiguous security concerns without concrete evidence. According to a Reuters report, the company maintained that such an action lacked transparency and procedural fairness.

The situation unfolds against a backdrop of rising diplomatic tensions. Following India’s retaliatory strikes under Operation Sindoor—which came after the Pahalgam terror attack that left 26 civilians dead—both Turkey and Azerbaijan have openly sided with Pakistan. This has triggered public backlash in India, with calls for boycotts gaining momentum.

Reports from the travel sector indicate a decline in bookings to both countries, accompanied by a wave of cancellations. The Confederation of All India Traders has also announced its decision to suspend commercial relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan.