TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 655X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellants filed an additional affidavit to bring on record certain additional documents. The counsels have been heard and we have also perused the original files produced by the respondents. The counsel for the respondents has also shown to us the complete minutes of the meetings of the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB). The appellants after the close of hearing, have handed over a short note of arguments. 2. The writ petition was filed impugning the order dated 13 th May, 2009 of the FIPB of revocation of the approval earlier accorded on 14th February, 2008 to the appellants to undertake activities of GSM based Cellular Telephone Services all over India. The FIPB withdrew the approval for the reason of security clearance having n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t foreign investors have no fundamental right to carry on business in India and to Star India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India 146 (2008) DLT 455 (DB). Mention was also made by the learned Single Judge of People's Union for Civil Liberties Vs. Union of India (2004) 2 SCC 476 and Vishnu Ram Borah Vs. Parag Saikia (1984) 2 SCC 488. 6. The learned Single Judge has held that though the appellants may have satisfied the other requirements of the policy concerning FDI, the security angle was a crucial factor and lack of security clearance in the instant case was a valid ground for withdrawal of the FIPB approval. It was further held that in matters of foreign investments in the country, what the decisive parameters shoul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in our montesquien system of separation of powers and the Court cannot usurp and the parameters of judicial review can never be exceeded. The Apex Court in Balco Employees Union (Regd.) v. UOI (2002) 2 SCC 333 extended the said principle further to spheres of economic policy and disinvestment. 8. The senior counsel for the appellants has of course taken us through the developments since the year 2005 and to the work done and expenditure incurred by the appellants and to the approvals, licenses and letters of intent given to the appellants from time to time but all this in our opinion, is irrelevant qua the reasons which prevailed with the respondents for revoking the clearance earlier granted to the appellants. 9. The senior counsel f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
