Regrettably, greybeard, now 17 posts and no proper answer! nitpickers answer is of course correct but the query from 'superfly' was 'why do you require a greater vis. without RVR at that airfield'? We still do not know. Have you actually looked at any current Jepp charts?
Most of the UK ILS charts quote only 'RVRxxxm'. We all (hopefully) know about converting met vis to RVR, so as long as generally you have a met vis of at least 550m you are ok for CATI. Why then is it necessary to publish a met vis? 800m is actually the visual approach minimum RVR, and why the quoted chart requires an equivalent RVR of at least 800m I know not. Do you?
Is this purely an 'Indian' thing? Does this appear on any European charts? I recall (going back a bit!) Pristina used to have only a met vis minimum for the ILS 35 which I think WAS 800m.
Aterpster?