Kitco and the KGS Aranmula International Airport, promoter of the proposed greenfiled airport at Aranmula in Pathanamthitta district, appear to be on a collision course with the former alleging that the project report given by it has been altered and interpolated.
Kitco Joint General Manager Dominic Chacko has clarified to R. Bhaskaran, the ombudsman for Travancore Cochin Devaswom Boards, that its pre-feasibility report on the proposed airport prepared in 2009 was altered without its consent or knowledge.
The High Court has initiated proceedings on the basis of a report given by the ombudsman, who reported that the height of flag mast of Aranmula Parthasarathi Temple could not be reduced to facilitate construction of an airport as the flag mast was installed according to tantric rules.In a statement filed before the Kerala High Court, P.T. Nandakumar, Executive Director, KGS group, said that the runway would be located 285 metres away from the boundary of the temple.In a statement filed before the Kerala High Court, P.T. Nandakumar, Executive Director, KGS group, said that the runway would be located 285 metres away from the boundary of the temple.
In a the clarification letter given to the ombudsman, the Joint General Manager said that Kitco had never suggested any kind of alteration to the temple mast in its project report. It seemed that the details of an obstacle survey conducted by an agency hired by the promoters of the airport were included in the report.
A chapter in the report on the tourism potential of the area seemed to have been replaced by the details of the obstacle survey report which had referred to the flag mast of the temple. In fact, the alteration was made on page 34 of the report.
Kitco told the ombudsman that it had only conducted a financial feasibility study on the airport. No technical study report was included in the report. In fact, the airport was conceived as small airport catering to small aircraft at an estimated cost of Rs 100 crore.
In fact, the Aero Survey India which conducted the obstacle survey said the threshold (starting) of the runway would be “displaced” by 285 metres from the temple compound.
He said the ombudsman for Travancore and Cochin Devaswom Boards had wrongly understood the meaning of “threshold displacement,” which meant starting point of the runway.
The High Court on Friday impleaded Kitco as a respondent in the case. The court also allowed S. Subash Chand, Advocate Commissioner appointed in the case, to collect various details in respect of the project and file a report.