The Delhi High Court (HC) on Tuesday ruled that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) can allow any person, entity or party to participate in its proceedings if such participation would aid the case or be in the public interest.
“…if in a given case certain investigation/inquiry is conducted by the commission against certain entities in respect of allegations of their indulgence in anti-competition practices, any party or person or entity or an enterprise having sufficient interest in the matter can be impleaded in the proceedings of the commission, which, in our opinion, will be only to further the public interest,” the court said.
Such impleadment would aid the commission in arriving at a correct and just conclusion in the proceedings, the court added. Observing this, the court dismissed UltraTech Cement’s challenge to the CCI’s decision to allow the Builders’ Association of India (BAI) to participate in an ongoing probe into alleged anti-competitive practices by grey cement manufacturers.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia held that BAI, as an all-India association of builders and a major consumer of grey cement, had sufficient interest in the proceedings and that allowing it to place its views before the CCI would serve the public interest.
The case arose from complaints received by CCI between December 2018 and May 2019 alleging that the conduct of certain cement manufacturers had adversely affected competition. BAI had also complained of alleged cartelisation resulting in abnormal increases in cement prices.
The CCI subsequently initiated a suo motu investigation under the Competition Act, 2002. The director general completed its investigation and submitted its report in July 2022.
BAI had initially sought to be impleaded while the investigation was still underway. The CCI rejected that request in December 2021. However, after the investigation was completed, the Delhi HC gave BAI liberty to approach the CCI afresh under the CCI General Regulations, 2009.
BAI accordingly moved a fresh application in September 2022. The CCI allowed it in July 2023, permitting BAI to participate in the proceedings, inspect non-confidential records, and submit its views on the investigation report. UltraTech challenged this decision before the HC.
UltraTech argued that the CCI’s order was passed without giving the company an opportunity to oppose BAI’s impleadment. It also contended that the CCI could not effectively review its earlier decision rejecting BAI’s request.
The HC rejected these arguments, saying that CCI regulations allow the market regulator to permit a person or enterprise to participate in proceedings where it is satisfied that the applicant has a substantial interest in the outcome and that its participation is necessary in the public interest.
The Bench said the CCI had recorded its satisfaction that BAI had a substantial interest, after observing that the association represented builders who were directly affected by anti-competitive conduct and that it was a major consumer of cement.
The Bench also stressed the public interest nature of proceedings under the Competition Act. It said such proceedings are intended to protect competition and consumers and are not ordinary adversarial litigation in which an existing party can decide who may participate.
The court consequently dismissed UltraTech’s appeal, while imposing no costs.
