That is a choice quote. It's amazing that India is the go-to place for outsourcing when they have such backwards ideas about security and software development. Historically, the most secure operating systems on the market have been "open", not closed.
That's a horrible generalisation. India has millions of developers. Just because one thinks security by obscurity is a good idea, doesn't mean they all do.
This is just one of them with a soapbox and the sort of government grant that keeps on giving.
I'll just say that I think the belief that closed == secure is a stupid notion given the history we all know, no matter who holds the belief.
if you take security to be assured in some sense, TCSEC might be a reasonable standard. I do not know of any open source operating system certified to A1, but there is at least one closed source OS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XTS-400
if you mean track record, in terms of number of compromises, i'd be interested to see the data.
Certification costs money which is most likely the real reason why open source OS's have not been "certified" as secure, not because they're intrinsically insecure. OpenBSD, for example, has a reputation for being secure.
FWIW none of the open source Unices have UNIX certification (http://www.opengroup.org/platform/unix_certification/) but that obviously is not preventing the spread of Linux into "enterprise" computing.