28.06.2013 Views

Annexure II - AERA

Annexure II - AERA

Annexure II - AERA

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

derive any material commercial advantage from the airport, the Authority is in<br />

effect indirectly regulating the use of land by airport operators.<br />

CONCLUSION ON LAND USAGE<br />

1. It is clear that the purpose of Land lease is twofold i.e. for (a) Airport and (b) Non­<br />

Airport activities as mentioned in the Land Lease Agreement.<br />

2. As per the provisions of the <strong>AERA</strong> Act, the Regulator is authorised to determine charges<br />

pertaining to the aeronautical charges at the Airport. Hence, the Regulator has no<br />

jurisdiction over the Land earmarked for Non-Airport activities.<br />

3. Under the concession agreement HIAL or the service provider have been given<br />

unrestricted right to determine the charges in respect to the activities other than the<br />

Regulated Charges as mentioned in Schedule 6 of the Concession Agreement. There is<br />

no provision as regards to cross-subsidizing the aero revenue using the revenues from<br />

Non-Airport Activities/real estate. Nor is there any mention about assigning a market<br />

value to land and reducing it from RAB . In fact the GoAP had given the land on lease as<br />

the project (which also includes Non-Airport Activities) was not feasible if the promoters<br />

were to acquire the Land on its own for the Project. By assigning a value to the land and<br />

reducing the same from the RAB <strong>AERA</strong> is contemplating an action which is not envisaged<br />

in the Concession Agreement and also goes against the intended purpose of the Land<br />

Lease Agreement and would significantly affect the feasibility of the Non-Airport activity<br />

component of the project<br />

Hence we request to leave the usage and treatment of the Land to the GoAP and GHIAL<br />

being Lessor and Lessee respectively. It may be appreciated that GoAP had already<br />

clarified to <strong>AERA</strong> that the reduction of Land value from RAB was not envisaged.<br />

A. Apart from above we have the following additional evidences in support of<br />

adoption of DUAL Till<br />

a. Ministry Of Civil Aviation's affidavit in <strong>AERA</strong>AT<br />

MoCA has filed its reply clarifying its contractual obligations with HIAL. As per<br />

MoCA, the terms of the Concession Agreement with HIAL has to form a vital<br />

consideration and basis for the determination of tariff for aeronautical services<br />

at the airport. MoCA in its affidavit to <strong>AERA</strong>AT has mentioned that it has used<br />

Shared/Hybrid till for determination of UDFof following airports:<br />

Jalpur,<br />

Amritsar,<br />

Udaipur,<br />

Varanasi,<br />

Mangalore,<br />

<strong>Annexure</strong> <strong>II</strong>-B<br />

CP No. 9/2013-14/T-12023(14)/1/2012- Tariff- Vol - <strong>II</strong>I <strong>Annexure</strong> <strong>II</strong>-B Page 11 of 51<br />

11

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!