COMPETITION LAW & • The 3 broad areas for the Competition Act
RIGHT TO INFORMATION to look at are:
Origin and Background of the Competition
Law in India
• In 2002, the Parliament of India enacted the
Competition Act, replacing the archaic
Monopoly and Restrictive Trade Practices Act
(popularly referred to as the MRTP Act) of 1969.
• The primary goal of the Act, as stated in the
preamble, is ‘…keeping in view of the economic
development of the country … to prevent
practices having adverse effect on competition,
to promote and sustain competition in markets,
to protect interests of consumers and to ensure
freedom of trade’.
• The Act intends to curb any activity that could
harm consumer welfare or freedom of any
individual (or individuals) to freely and fairly
compete in the market.
• Competition Act 2002 got the Presidential
assent on 13 January 2003, but the
implementation of substantive provisions of
the Act came into effect on 20 May 2009. The
undecided cases of the previous regime
continued to be adjudicated until the MRTP Act
was finally repealed by an Ordinance of the
Parliament in August 2009 making the same
effective on 1 September, 2009.
• Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of India
guarantees all citizens of India a right to
practice any profession or to carry on any
occupation, trade or business subject to the
condition that the state shall in public interest
1. No enterprise or association of enterprises or
impose reasonable restrictions to such freedom
by enacting suitable legislations.
• Article 301 of the Constitution of India, read
with Articles 302 and 304(b), empower the
Parliament to enact suitable laws to reasonably
restrict freedom of trade throughout the
territory of India.
2. Any agreement entered into in contravention of
a. cartelizing behavior of the firms,
b. abuse of dominant position, and
c. mergers and acquisition.
• Cartels can be interpreted as the joint effort
on the part of firms in an industry to drive
prices higher than warranted under
competitive conditions. Firms may not
collude (and form a cartel) because short-
term deviations from collusion agreements
yield significant short-term payoffs. One
interpretation of this argument is that the
free markets would dissuade any cartel
agreements. (e.g.: Cement Cartel, BCCI,
Pharmaceutical sector cases)
• Abuse of dominance arises when a firm
utilizes its monopoly power in one market
to extend it to the other markets; in other
words, it impedes the competitive
landscape in the other markets.
• Similarly, mergers and acquisitions, by their
very nature, reduce the competition in the
market.
• All these practices can harm consumer
welfare and can arise out of free market
condition. Therefore, a competition act is
required in order to dissuade firms from
undertaking any activity that harms
consumer welfare significantly.
ANTI-COMPETITION AGREEMENTS (SEC. 3)
person or association of persons shall enter
into any agreement in respect of production,
supply, distribution, storage, acquisition or
control of goods or provision of services, which
causes or is likely to cause an appreciable
adverse effect on competition within India.
the provisions contained in sub-section (1) shall
be void.
• The Act under Section 3(1) prevents any
enterprise or association from entering into any
agreement which causes or is likely to cause
an appreciable adverse effect on competition
(AAEC) within India. The Act clearly envisages
that an agreement which is contravention of
Section 3(1) shall be void.
HOW TO DETERMINE AAEC?
• The Act provides that any agreement including
cartels, which-
 Directly or indirectly determines
purchase or sale prices;
 Limits production, supply, technical
development or provision of services in
market;
 Results in bid rigging or collusive bidding
• Shall be presumed to have an appreciable
adverse effect on competition in India
• Proviso to Section 3 of the Act provides that the
aforesaid criteria shall not apply to joint
ventures entered with the aim to increase
efficiency in production, supply, distribution,
acquisition and control of goods or services.
• Anti-competitive agreements are further
classified into Horizontal
agreements and Vertical agreements.
HORIZONTAL AGREEMENTS
• Horizontal agreements are arrangements
between enterprises at the same stage of
production. Section 3(3) of the Act provides
that such agreements includes cartels, engaged
in identical or similar trade of goods or
provision of services, which-
 Directly or indirectly determines
purchase or sale prices
 Limits or controls production, supply
 Shares the market or source of
production
 Directly or indirectly results in bid
rigging or collusive bidding
• Under the Act HORIZONTAL AGREEMENTS are
placed in a special category and are subject to
the adverse presumption of being anti-
competitive. This is also known as ‘per se’ rule.
This implies that if there exists a horizontal
agreement under Section 3(3) of the Act, then it
will be presumed that such an agreement is
anti-competitive and has an appreciable
adverse effect on competition
VERTICAL AGREEMENTS
• Vertical agreements are those agreements
which are entered into between two or more
enterprises operating at different levels of
production. For instance between suppliers and
dealers. Other examples of anti-competitive
vertical agreements include:
• Exclusive supply agreement & refusal to
deal
• Resale price maintenance
• Tie-in-arrangements
• Exclusive distribution agreement
• The ‘per se’ rule as applicable for horizontal
agreements does not apply for vertical
agreements. Hence, a vertical agreement is
not per se anti-competitive or does not have
an appreciable adverse effect on competition.
ABUSE OF DOMINANT POSITION
• Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 prevents
any enterprise or group from abusing its
dominant position. The Act also provides
circumstances under which there is abuse of
dominant position. Section 4(2) of Act prevents
following acts resulting in abuse of dominant
position:
1. Impose unfair or discriminatory
condition or price in sale and purchase of
goods or services;
2. Limit or restrict;
 3. Production of goods or services
4. Technical or scientific development
relating to goods or services to the
prejudice of consumers;
• Indulges in practice resulting in denial of
market access;
1. Make conclusion of contracts subject to
acceptance by other parties;
2. Use its dominant position in one market
to enter into other relevant market;
• According to the Act, dominant position means
a position of strength, enjoyed by an enterprise
in the relevant market in India which enables it
to:
1. Operate independently of competitive
forces in relevant market
2. Affect competitors, consumers or relevant
market in its favor
COMBINATION
• Section 5 of the Act defines the term
“Combination” as acquisition of one or more
enterprises by one or more persons or merger
or amalgamation of enterprise shall be
combination of such enterprise. The statutory
provisions as enumerated under Sections 5 and
6 of the Act primarily envisages that any merger
or acquisition (M&A) taking place within  the
Indian Sub-continent has to be examined on the
touchstone of the Competition Act, 2002 by the
Competition watchdog i.e. Competition
Commission of India (Commission).
• One of the intrinsic requirements of regulatory
controls on combination is to analyze the
impact on the level of competition within a
relevant market. The said concern assumes
importance particularly where M&A would give
the new company the ability to alter or fix
prices in a particular sector.
• There is a fear that the new company which
emerges pursuant to merger or acquisition will
eliminate competition and would utilize its
market power to set prices in the relevant
market.
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA (CCI),
• Chapter III of the Competition Act,
2002 provides for the establishment of
Competition Commission of India (CCI).  The
Competition Commission of India (CCI), which is
solely responsible for the enforcement and
administration of the Competition Act.
• The CCI comprises of a chairperson and not
fewer than 2 and not more than 6 other
members to be appointed by the Government
of India. The CCI presently comprises 5
members, including the chairman.
• The statutory provision further entails that the
Chairperson and other members of the
Commission shall possess special knowledge
and professional experience of not less than 15
years in international trade, economics,
business, commerce, law, finance, accountancy
etc.
• The CCI may initiate an inquiry in relation to an
anti-competitive agreement or abuse of
dominant position either on its own, on the
basis of information or knowledge in its
possession, or on receipt of information or on
the receipt of a reference from the government
or a statutory authority.
• Any person, consumer or their associations can
file a complaint/information relating to anti-
competitive agreements and abuse of dominant
position. With respect to combinations, the CCI
may initiate an inquiry either on its own or on
the basis of the notification by the firms
proposing to enter into the combination.
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE
COMMISSION
• To eliminate practices having adverse effect on
competition, promote and sustain competition,
protect interests of consumers and ensure
freedom of trade by other participants
• Inquire into certain agreements and dominant
position of enterprise– It provides that the
Commission may either suo moto  or on receipt
of any information of alleged contravention of
Section 3 (prohibits anti-competitive
agreements) may inquire into the same.
• Inquiry into combinations– Section 20 of the
Act entrusts the Commission with the power to
inquire into any information relating to
acquisition and determine whether such
combination or acquisition may have an
appreciable adverse effect on competition
(AAEC).
• Reference of an issue by a statutory authority
to the Commission– Section 21 of the
Act enumerates that in the course of a
proceeding if any issue is raised that any
decision of a statutory authority will be in
conflict with the provisions of the Competition
Act, 2002, the statutory authority shall make a
reference in this regard to the Commission.
• Reference by Commission– Section 21A of the
Act provides that if in the course of proceeding
an issue is raised by any party that any decision
taken by the Commission is in contravention of
the provisions of Competition Act, whose
authority is entrusted to a statutory authority
then the Commission may make a reference in
respect of the issue to the statutory authority.
• Power to issue interim order– Section 33 of the
Act empowers the Commission to issue interim
orders in cases of anti-competitive agreements
and abuse of dominant position, thereby
temporarily restraining any party from carrying
on such an act.
• Competition Advocacy– Section 49 of the
Act provides for competition advocacy and
enumerates that the Central or the State
Government may while formulating any policy
on Competition or any other matter may make
reference to the Commission for its opinion on
possible effect of such policy on Competition.
However, the opinion given by the Commission
is not binding on the Central Government.
RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005
 Evolution and concept
 Practice and procedures
• A citizen has been given many rights as per the
Indian Constitution and various other legislation
for e.g. Rights to freedom of speech and
expression, Right to Life, Right to Personal
Liberty, Right to Vote, Right to Educations etc.
Besides all these rights and many more, a
citizen is also given Right to seek information
under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
• This RIGHT TO INFORMATION is of paramount
importance to a democratic form of
government. It empowers the citizens to
participate in the functions of the government
by way of seeking information from Centre,
State Governments and all public authorities. A
citizen has a right to know and seek information
on the basis of this Act. It is a very powerful
legislation which empowers a citizen to know
and participate in government functions in a
very larger sense. It has built trust between the
citizen and the government. A citizen pays taxes
to the government but never knows where the
money is spent. Now with the enactment of this
legislation a citizen can seek information from
the government as to where his hard earned
money is spent by the government authorities.
• It is a milestone in enhancing transparency,
accountability and responsiveness of the
Government. The information disclosure in
India was limited due to dominating culture of
bureaucrats, existence of the Official Secrets
Act, 1923 and also unawareness of the public at
large in respect to their rights. However, due to
the act, the power to seek information lies at
the Centre of the democratic mechanism i.e.,
with the people.
• Basically promote transparency, contain
corruption, and hold the Government
accountable to citizens
• It gives the right to citizens to request
information held by public authorities from
 appointed public information officers in each
governmental department
SCOPE OF THE ACT & ITS COVERAGE
• The scope of the Act extends to the whole of
India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir
where a separate enactment is in force known
as the J&K Right to Information Act, 2009.
Scope of the act directly includes the
instrumentality of the government and all
public authorities.
• Private bodies are not included per se but by a
decision of the Central information Commission
in the case of Sarabjit Roy, it brought privatized
public utility companies within the purview of
the provision of the act.
• Political Parties are also included under the
ambit of the act, though a bill against the same
is lying pending in the parliament.
HOW TO SEEK INFORMATION UNDER THE
ACT
• A citizen can seek information by the virtue of
Section 6 and 7, which provide:
• Any citizen of India can seek information.
• The application is to be made to an officer of
the public authority who is designated as
Central Public Information Officer (CPIO).
• All the public authorities have designated their
Central Public Information Officer and have
posted their particulars on their respective
web-sites.
• This information is also available on the ‘RTI
PORTAL’ (www.rti.gov.in). Persons seeking
information can to refer to the web-site of the
concerned public authority of the ‘RIT PORTAL’
for ascertaining the name of the concerned
CPIO.
• The application can be made in English or Hindi.
• The application can be sent by email, post or
personally delivered at the address of the public
authority.
• No reason is necessary to be given for the
request of information.
• The applicant is required to send a bankers
draft, or Indian postal order of Rs. 10 along with
application and any further fees would be
intimated by the CPIO. However persons below
poverty line are exempted from this provision
but they have to furnish proof of belonging to
the below poverty line.
• If the person does not complete the formalities
of fees, the application would be invalid and no
information would be supplied on the same.
• If the application concerns to a different public
authority it be transferred by the receiving
authority within 5 days of receipt
• The Central Public Information Officer/ State
Public Information Officer is to give information
or reject the request as soon as possible or
within a maximum of 30 days.
• If the request is rejected, reasons to be given by
the Public Authority.
• If the information sought concerns life or
liberty of a person, it is furnished within 48
hours of receipt.
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT
THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS EXMPT
FROM DISCLOSURE I.E. WILL NOT BE PROVIDED AT
REQUEST OF CITIZEN:
• Information, which is expressly forbidden by
any court of law or tribunal or the dispute of
which may constitute contempt of court,
• Information the disclosure of which would
endanger life, or physical safety of any person
or identify the source of information or
assistance given in confidence for law
enforcement or security purpose,
• Information, which could impede the process of
investigation or apprehension or prosecution of
offenders and also exempts Cabinet papers
• The exemption of the organization, however,
does not apply to information relating to
allegations of corruption and human rights
violations.
PENALTIES FOR DEFAULT IN PROVIDING
INFORMATION
• Penalties which are the sanction of the law are
provided under Section 18 of the act. In case
the public authority does not accept
application, or there is unnecessary delay in
furnishing information, or denies the
information with a malafide intent, or gives an
incomplete report, or destroys the requested
information or obstructs the furnish of
information in any manner would be liable to
pay Rs. 250 per day up to a maximum of Rs.
25,000.
EXEMPTION FROM DISCLOSURE OF
INFORMATION (SEC. 8)
j. information which relates to personal
information the disclosure of which has not
relationship to any public activity or interest, or
which would cause unwarranted invasion of the
privacy of the individual unless the Central
Public Information Officer or the State Public
Information Officer or the appellate authority,
as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger
public interest justifies the disclosure of such
information:
Provided that the information, which cannot be
denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall
not be denied to any person.
Union Public Service Commission v. R.K Jain
(2012 Delhi HC)
• Required information regarding third party
• UPSC refused, CIC allowed
• The information sought was of personal nature
and disclosure thereof had no relationship to
any public activity or interest and may infringe
upon the privacy of the individual concerned.
• Personal Information (third party information)
held by a public authority can be disclosed
under two circumstances:
• it has a relationship to the public activity
(i.e. his activities falling in the public
domain) of the third party,
• there is a larger public interest involved.
• “larger public interest”
• Information having a bearing on the
state of the economy; the moral values
in the society; the environment;
national safety, etc.
• Information relating to disciplinary inquiries
against public servants are “personal
information” and disclosure would cause
unwarranted invasion of privacy of an individual
 Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in
Centre of Earth Science Studies Vs. Anson
Sebastian AIR 2010 Ker 150 holding that
information sought by an employee from his
employer in respect of domestic enquiry and
confidential reports of his colleagues would not
amount to personal information within the
meaning of Section 8(1)(j) of the Act. 
PERSONAL INFORMATION OF PUBLIC
AUTHORITIES
• Public authorities cannot claim that
information held by them in relation to
themselves, is ‘personal’. The expression
“personal information” found in the RTI Act
refers to information that is personal to another
individual. The Protection under Section 8(1)(j)
extends to juristic persons (corporations, etc.)
as well.
• Jamia Millia Islamia v Sk Ikramuddin (2011 SC)