The Delhi High Court on Thursday upheld the government's decision to revoke security clearances of Turkish owned aviation company Çelebi without prior notice, ruling that national security considerations can override principles of natural justice [Celebi Airport Services India Private Limited v. Union of India].

Justice Sachin Datta emphasised the primacy of national security over procedural fairness.

"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 observed.

The Court placed reliance on Supreme Court judgment in Ex-Armymen's Protection Services v. Union of India which had held that procedural protections can yield to security imperatives and in a situation of national security, a party cannot insist for the strict observance of the principles of natural justice.

"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The Ministry of Civil Aviation, acting through the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS), had withdrawn Çelebi’s security clearance on May 15, 2025, invoking national security grounds.

The government's decision followed the recent four-day Indo-Pak military conflict during which the Turkish government openly backed Pakistan.

Following the May 15 revocation, the Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL) had terminated its contracts with Çelebi.

Çelebi, a wholly-owned Indian subsidiary of Turkish parent company Çelebi Aviation Holding, challenged the move before the High Court shortly after.

Two entities of Celebi filed petitions before the High Court.

One was filed by Celebi Airport Services India Private Limited, a company engaged in providing professional ground handling services at Indira Gandhi International Airport (Delhi), Cochin International Airport, Bengaluru International Airport, Rajiv Gandhi International Airport (Hyderabad) and Goa International Airport.

A second petition was filed by Celebi Delhi Cargo Terminal Management India Private Limited engaged in the business of providing cargo handling services at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi.

The company termed the Indian government's justification for its decision as “vague” and “unsubstantiated,” asserting that such actions jeopardise foreign investor confidence and threaten the livelihoods of over 3,800 Indian employees.

The company also clarified that while it has Turkish ownership, operational and managerial control of its Indian entity is handled by an India-based team, and that it has maintained a clean track record for over a decade at major airports.

In Mumbai, domestic operator Indothai has been brought in to take over the firm’s ground handling services. Çelebi has filed a plea challenging such measures before the Bombay High Court as well.

The Celebi contended before the Delhi High Court that the government's action violated Rule 12 of the Aircraft (Security) Rules, 2023, which mandates that the Director General of BCAS must provide an opportunity of being heard and record reasons in writing before suspending or cancelling any security clearance.

However, the Court accepted the Union government’s submission — made by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta — that national security imperatives justified immediate and confidential action without pre-decisional hearing.

The government also relied on statutory powers under Section 6 of the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024 and Section 5A(1A) of the Aircraft Act, 1934.

The Court expressly held that interpreting Rule 12 of Airport Security Rules as mandating a pre-decisional hearing in every case, regardless of the nature of security concerns would frustrate the very objective for which the Director General of BCAS has been vested with powers under the law.

The Court examined classified intelligence materials presented by the government in sealed cover and concluded that legitimate national security concerns existed.

"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," Justice Datta stated.

The judgment specifically noted concerns about 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.

The Court found that the companies' Turkish ownership and extensive access to sensitive airport areas, including aircraft, cargo holds and security zones elevated the security risk.

"Ground handling services at airports offer deep access to airside operations, aircrafts, cargo, passenger information system and security zones," the judgment observed.

The Court found the government's action was authorized under Section 6 of the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024, which empowers the Director General of BCAS to issue directions for national security purposes.

The judgment also referenced India's obligations under Annexure 17 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation, which mandates background checks and access controls.

"The State/respondents are indeed justified in taking prompt and definitive action so as to completely obviate the possibility of country's civil aviation and national security being compromised," the Court concluded.

Hence, it dismissed both the petitions.

Celebi was represented by Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Sandeep Sethi and Darpan Wadhwa with advocate Ritu Bhalla, Partner at Luthra & Luthra.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma represented the Union of India.

In Mumbai, domestic operator Indothai has been brought in to take over the Celebi's ground handling services. Çelebi has filed a plea challenging such measures before the Bombay High Court as well.

[Read Judgment]