VIMANA NILDHANA VISTHARANA VIRODHI SAMITHI
ADYAPADY VILLAGE, MANGALORE TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA -574142
Bangalore Support Group: 153, 5th Main, 4th Block, Banashankari 3rd Stage, 2nd Phase,
Bangalore 560 085. INDIA
Telefax: 91-80-6614855 Email: [email protected] [email protected]
The
Secretary General
International
Civil Aviation Organisation
1000,
Sherbrooke Street West
Suite
400
Montreal
Quebec
Canada
H3A 2R2
06
November 1998
Reg.: Clarification sought with regard to
compliance of ICAO Airport Design Standards by the Airports Authority of India
in the construction of Second Runway and terminal tower at the Bajpe Airport,
Mangalore.
Dear
Sir or Madam,
The
undersigned is the Secretary of the Vimana
Nildhana Vistharana Virodhi Samithi, which translates from the original
Kannada language to “Airport Expansion Opposition Committee”. This committee has for the past decade been
resisting the expansion of the Bajpe Airport in the coastal city of Mangalore
of Karnataka State, India for a combination of reasons including lapses with
regard to considerations relating to the planning, technical compliane,
environmental and social impacts of the project.
The
undersigned has also initiated a Public Interest Litigation against the said
project before the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Writ Petition No.
37681/1997. The judgement with regard
to the same is presently reserved.
In
the response filed by the Airports Authority of India with regard to the
aforementioned petition, it has been submitted to the Honourable Court that:
“It is
completely false to suggest that the respondents have violated the standards
and recommendations of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) to
which India is a signatory, is totally false and unfounded. It is submitted that as regards the minimum
width of the runway is concerned, the respondents have already filed their
differences with the ICAO to the effect that if the existing airport is to be
upgraded, then the existing runway strip’s width will continue if the
additional land is not available.
Presently the same is under the consideration of the ICAO.”
The
above response was filed in reaction to our contention that the said airport
was being developed without ensuring the minimum prescribed width of 300 metres
for an instrument runway, as prescribed by the ICAO standards and Indian Law in
this regard. Evidence has been provided to the Court to demonstrate that
throughout the extent of the runway the minimum width of 300 metres is not
available and also that the entire location is surrounded by a drop of 100
metres.
With
regard to the above, I would appreciate if your office could clarify with
regard to the following:
1.
Whether India has made a notification under Article 38 of
the ICAO?
2.
Whether the Airports Authority of India has notified the
“differences” with regard to the width of the runway for the proposed 2nd
runway and terminal of the Mangalore airport.
As
we are requesting this information in the public interest, we deeply appreciate
your earliest response in this regard.
Should you need any assistance from us, or any clarifications on the
matter, please contact us at the aforementioned addresses.
Further,
we will be obliged to send a copy of our petition if needed. The same may also be downloaded from the
website: http://www.altindia.net/esg/index.htm.
(The item is listed as Bajpe airport petition)
Thank
you for your cooperation and support.
With
best wishes,
Yours
truly,
Arthur
Pereira
Secretary