We had never had a problem in the past either. Recently, that's no longer the case, unfortunately.

There is no justification for that. The British Government stepped over its bounds. An Indian passport is property of the Govt of India. No Govt, other than the GoI has a right to take it away from the holder.
Some of them would like to treat India as their colony.

I used the word impossible in the sense that it's impossible for a Govt to deny visa to people who have Muslim names, who were once Indian citizens and call it self a responsible Government.
It's idiocy and paranoia. People like David Headley, aka as Dawood Gilani, will submit fraudulent applications supported by forged documents, but people who want to visit India for legitimate reasons will bear the brunt of this lunacy.
You are weill aware how some of the usual suspects on FT will respond to this complaint with "a sovereign nation has a right to deny entry to anyone. Visa is not a right of a foreign citizen." It's not illegal to deny visa to a Muslim, but I, along with you, question the legitimacy of such policy.

Does anyone know the turnaround time for issuing an Indian Business Visa in Singapore for a Singaporean citizen?

Ofcourse they ( the western countries) wont refuse the student visas.. they get away with charging the foreign students 3-4 times the fees they can charge the local population .. but yes they do ensure to ask for lots and lots of documentation as proof.. these students are helping so so many of these universities sustain .. no wonder these foreign univs now do roadshows to attract more and more foreign students..

u r right.. though i have never been denied a visa , I see that the docs for some Eu countries are simply funny.. but we as Indians don't have any say in it..and our companies / sponsors just sigh and do it.. but these countries get away by saying its for their security.. I can safely say some countries know how to make use of ''non tariff barriers'' in a very nice way to reduce or dscourage foreigners from being able to freely work in their countries...

I don't know where you get your information. The fact is that at a university that has in-state and out of state tuition fees, foreign student pays no more than a U.S. citizen who is an out of state student.
Why should they not ask for documentation?
It's perfectly reasonable to ask for proper documentation. Good universities don't need to do a road show. They have enough quality applicants.

U r right on the out of state student fees, and this is one reason i believe tht we get less out of state than foreign students in the campuses..good universities also do road shows sometimes.. I hv seen advts from Insead, NUS Business school , Spore ,London business school and many many american univ's..
I perfectly understand universities or govts asking for more docs in case of students / tourists ... but I see that there is always a tendency to criticize steps taken by Indian govt for visas, immigration etc whereas the coutries which oppose these rules also hv similiar or if not more stringent requirements.. take the case of any work permit application for EU or CEE regions.. u will b surprised to know wht all they want..and Indian visa regulations r nothing compared to those..That was my intention of posting the above ..

Though US universities pitch abroad, its to recruit top students from countries. Foreign students pay just as much as US students at private universities and as much as out of state students for state schools. Of course the rules are different in the UK where there is a UK resident price and a foreigner price and the difference is quite large. Yaatri all the good schools definitely pitch abroad. Why? There are plenty of students who do not know about intl financial aid or do not have the confidence or thought to even apply (I know this first hand by pitching my school in HK). Lots of are just information sessions to give the kids more information and of course, get them to apply.

The EU is stringent when it comes to visas for any foreigner (even rich countries like the US), not just Indians and those from other developing nations.

But (and I say this as someone with Indian parents who are naturalised US citizens and have visited relatives in India all my life), Indians and those from 3rd world countries are seen as potential immigration threats (ie. people who will overstay visas illegally etc), whereas this is most certainly NOT the case for the say, the vast majority of Americans, Europeans etc (people from rich countries) who travel to India. In most cases, such people pay their visa fees, stay at the Oberoi/4-5 star properties, spend a ton (relatively and on an absolute basis) of money, visit tourist sites, overpay for souveneirs/crafts/clothes and then go home.

So I would argue that it makes far more sense, for say the UK/US, to have more stringent visa policies than India.

Of course, in the end, India is a soveriegn nation and it can do what it wants, but that does not mean it makes sense.

As a US citizen with a fair amount of exposure to this area, I can say that the EU is really not as stringent as some would like to make it out to be if the person is from one of the "rich countries like the US".

Yes, yes and yes. It seems to me that in the last ten years there has been a skyrocketing in the proportion of Americans and Brits (and others from countries with higher GDP per capita than India) overstaying in India and/or otherwise violating the law in India after being allowed entry into India.

Job security (including job promotion opportunities) for their own near and dear ones is a big reason why the Indian politicians and bureaucrats want these changes. Of course the other big reasons are "national security", reciprocity and/or petty revenge (when and where or if different).

I have my own views on the above.. BUT it will make me take country names, their policies and whether their citizens overstay or not.. fact is that India is much better than it was even 15 yrs ago, today most of the fortune 500 cos hv Indians / asians supporting them because of various reasons we all r aware of..IMHO, US is where it is only because of immigrants who sometimes need to work harder and work more at lesser pay ...lets not discuss this here..
Can just say that some countries need to stop poking their nose at evry thing in the world.. let them see their financial situation etc and then see others who may hv smaller systems BUT much more stable..

Thats exactly what.. I dont recall any WTO or other global agreement regarding removing trade and non trade barriers does it discriminate between 'rich' and other countries.. BUT having been in Europe on and off for the last 3-4 years on valid Work permits, I can safely say that EU countries follow this policy.. and yes. they r scared of losing their jobs and hence hv real funny and tough requirements for visas which make the competition tht much smaller since many folks from the ''not rich'' countries will not waste that much time in getting visa of their countries.. and dont forget most of these countries are smaller than even a state in india and with no decent gdp or world standing to speak of !!!
We will not get into the reason abt why folks from 'not rich' countries then need to come here as this post was abt informing that not only India but other 'rich' and also 'not so rich' countires of EU hv and change their visa / immigration rules whenever they want and mostly to the detriment of the foreign citizens.. Anyone recall something done retrospectively by a leading country in W.Eruope which was challenged in court .

EU being tough! dont be so silly, the easiest way to guarantee entry is to claim asylum and then after 5 years, we will even give you an EU passport.

EU is all talk and no action. Nothing but a group of extreme liberal left teddy bears!

Its kind of an ironic thing. Don't most Indians not even have registered births? Though I read the government would like to change that. So the government is going to make something their own people lack a requirement for foreigners.

Not calling it a "bad idea". Just find it somehow ironic.

There are a few, but certainly not "most"