Airlines have sent a request to the Adani group demanding records of all consultations concerning the reconstruction of Mumbai Airport's Terminal 1, starting from 2020. This request casts doubt on the airport operator's statement that extensive consultations with airlines took place during that period.
In a message addressed to Mumbai International Airport Ltd (MIAL), which is controlled by the Adani group, the Airline Operators Committee (AOC) also demanded clarification on the basis for requiring airlines to shift 33 percent of international flights to the newly opened Navi Mumbai International Airport (NMIA) by October 25.
AAHL, which manages both airports—Mumbai and Navi Mumbai—previously stated in a press release that airlines were asked to move their services to Navi Mumbai due to 'safety issues related to the 60-year-old building (Mumbai Airport Terminal 1)'.
AAHL CEO Arun Bansal asserted that 'extensive consultations with airlines regarding the future of Terminal 1 have been ongoing since 2020, and the proposed reconstruction was presented to AERA (Airport Economic Regulation Authority) and subsequently included in the approved tariff structure. While we appreciate the concerns raised by some airlines, passenger safety must remain paramount.'
However, the AOC responded on Sunday by requesting details of the consultation records from 2020 and noting that the Adani group acquired MIAL only in mid-2021. The AOC stated: 'The media release mentions that 'extensive consultations with airlines regarding the future of T1 have been ongoing since 2020'. As this is a specific statement by the airport operator, we request that all meeting minutes (MoMs), consultation records, and documented outcomes of all such meetings from 2020 be provided and shared with stakeholders.'
The Committee emphasized that this is particularly relevant because 2020 was the COVID-19 pandemic period, and Adani only took over the management of Mumbai Airport in mid-2021. It added that these documents must be provided before comprehensive stakeholder consultations take place.
Airlines also asked AAHL to 'clarify the basis for the claimed 33 percent impact on international flights or traffic'. The AOC posed several questions, including: 'Does this relate to terminal capacity, passenger flow, flights, or slots? What methodology and capacity assessment were used to arrive at this figure, and at which stakeholder meeting was this proposal discussed and agreed upon? Was any proposed reduction/relocation of slots considered in accordance with IATA's WSG/WASG principles?'
The International Air Transport Association (IATA) establishes internationally recognized principles for the allocation and management of airport slots through its World Airport Slot Guidelines (WASG) and Slot Guidelines (WSG).
The AOC noted that airlines fully support the safe and timely reconstruction and development of Terminal 1. Nevertheless, this support should not be construed as agreement with any reduction, cancellation, or relocation of existing international operations without proper data, transparency, and consultation.
Currently, all international flights at Mumbai Airport operate from Terminal 2. According to AAHL data, about 5 million domestic passengers per year should be shifted from Terminal 1 to Terminal 2 at Mumbai Airport. Consequently, approximately 33 percent of international flights currently operating from Mumbai Airport's Terminal 2 should be moved to NMIA.
To ensure 'transparency', the AOC requested monthly actual data on the utilization of Terminal 1 and Terminal 2 capacity at Mumbai Airport for every month of 2026, as well as the available and declared capacity of both terminals on Sunday.
The Committee pointed out that this data is necessary to understand the justification for shifting flights when Terminal 1 currently serves about 10 million passengers annually, with a declared capacity of 15 million passengers per year.
Furthermore, the committee separately requested a detailed reconstruction plan for Terminal 1, covering its scope, phases, timelines, as well as the operational and capacity impact at each stage.
In its press release, AAHL announced that NMIA will offer a 100 percent discount on landing fees for new international flights, as well as monetary vouchers to compensate for the difference in User Development Fee (UDF) between the two airports. UDF is a passenger fee charged by the airport as part of the cost paid by travelers.
The AOC stated that such incentives do not solve its immediate problem. 'This (incentives) is not what airlines are looking for at this stage. The immediate need is transparency regarding the T1 reconstruction plan, timelines, capacity assessment, and operational transition,' he added.
The Committee noted that airlines cannot 'agree' to any unilateral reduction, relocation, or subsequent changes to their existing operations or slots without the necessary data, a detailed plan, and proper consultation. The AOC's goal was to support the reconstruction of Terminal 1 while ensuring that existing airline operations, connectivity, and established slots are not negatively affected without a transparent and properly consulted process.