Because it breaks Net Neutrality.
I give India credit for being smart.
Actually, India said "no" for two large reasons:
(1) There was a specific Indian Internet startup that has about 5% of the Jobs Board market, and they were about to be shut out of the market that Facebook was about to open up by providing Jobs Board access to pretty much everyone -- only not their Jobs Board. Rather than pay the entry fee, and join the subsidy group of web sites, this startup decided to spend the money they would have spent on that lobbying against the idea, and buying as many politicians as they could.
(2) The jobs market in India is highly competitive, and this would have opened up the "haves" to competition from the "have nots", in terms of people applying for the same jobs that they felt were rightfully theirs. In other words: it was egalitarian, and based on whether you had sufficient merit to compete in the jobs marketplace, rather than being based on your social standing (i.e. read as: can afford to pay for Internet access in order to apply for the jobs in question).
In the first case, it was potentially raising a barrier to new startups who could not afford the buy-in; the buy-in was subsequently restructured as a "percentage of net revenue", so as to be non-discriminatory against smaller companies (but by then, the trigger had been pulled on the "Net Neutrality" gun).
In the second case, however, it was simply the people with Internet access being anti-competition from those "lower caste" persons who currently don't have the access, but who would potentially be winning jobs away from "higher caste" persons.
I can understand an insistence on a percentage of net profits being able to "buy access", even if that amounts to nothing more than $1/year, so as to not create a barrier to entry, but I really can't fathom building a wall between the people who can afford Internet access and people who canb't afford Internet access, and then forcing the people who can't afford Internet access to pay for its construction.
(and if that hit a little close to home for some people -- good: it was intended to).