JYOTI SAWROOP ARORA vs COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2016 Supreme(Del) 4195

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
JYOTI SAWROOP ARORA – Appellant
Versus
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Vikas Goel and Mr. Abhishek Kumar, R.V. Prabhat and Mr. J.S. Arora.
For the Respondents: Mr. D.P. Singh, Ms. Snuchita Shrivastava and Mr. Devansh Arya, Mr. Avinash Sharma, Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Mr. Navin Kumar and Mr. Bipin Kumar, Mr. Amir Singh Pasrich and Ms. Vinita Chhatwal, Mr. Dhruv Rajain, Mr. G. Ramakrishna Prasad, Ms. Tatini Basu and Ms. Lovely Kumari Singh, Mr. Preshit Surshe, Ms. Chandni Mehra, Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Mrs. Aayushi S. Khazanchi and Mr. Karan Luthra, Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, with Ms. Kalyani Singh, Ms. Ambika Soni, Ms. Sweta Kakad, Ms. Monika tyagi and Mr. Anukrit Gupta, Mr. M.M. Sharma, Ms. Deepika Rajpal and Mr. Danish Khan, Mr. Krishnan Venugopal, with Mr. Rahul Goel, Ms. Anu Monga, Mr. Nitish Sharma and Mr. Neeraj Lalwani, Ms. Neelambera Sandeepan and Mr. Sammith S., Ms. Anindita Barman and Mr. Keshav Mohan, Mr. Devashish Bharuka and Mr. Abraham C. Mathews, Mr. Subodh Prasad Deo and Ms. Radhika Seth, Mr. H.S. Chandhoke, Ms. Deeksha Manchanda and Mr. Arjun Nihal Singh.

JUDGMENT :

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugns the order dated 3rd February, 2015 of the respondent no.1 Competition Commission of India (CCI) in case No.59/2011 holding no violation of the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 having been committed, inspite of the Director General (DG) of the CCI in its Report having recommended that there is contravention of the provisions of the Act. The petition was entertained and notice thereof issued.

2. After notice, when the petition was listed before this Court on 12th February, 2016, I had of my own enquired from the counsels whether not such an order was appealable before the Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT).

3. The counsels drew attention to Section 53A(1)(a) of the Competition Act which empowers COMPAT “to hear and dispose of appeals against any direction issued or decision made or order passed by the Commission under Sub-Sections (2) and (6) of Section 26…….”. It was further pointed out that Sub-Section (2) of Section 26 provides for CCI, on receipt a reference from the Central Government or a State Government or a Statutory Authority or information received under Sectio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2016 Supreme(Del) 4195

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAWJYOTI SAWROOP ARORA – AppellantVersusCOMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
JYOTI SAWROOP ARORA – Appellant
Versus
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA – Respondent