1. Consequent upon the repeal of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 ('the MRTP Act'), the instant case pertaining to alleged cartelization in steel industry was transferred to the Commission from the Office of Director General (Investigation & Registration) of the MRTP Commission ('DG I&R') in view of the provisions contained under section 66(6) of the Competition Act, 2002 ('the Act').

Facts

2. The MRTP Commission took cognizance of the matter on the basis of an article published in the Financial Express on 11.03.2008 wherein it was reported that the steel companies raised the steel prices without any justification, which have a sharp inflationary impact. It was also reported that the prices immediately impact the construction and automobile sector. In the news article, it was further reported that even state-owned firms like Steel Authority of India Limited ('SAIL') and Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited ('RINL') have raised the prices.

3. Subsequently, Engineering Export Promotion Council (EEPC) - a body sponsored by Ministry of Commerce, Government of India - vide its complaint dated 18.03.2008 addressed to the DG I&R also apprehended possible cartelization in the steel industry and requested for intervention in terms of the provisions of the MRTP Act. The EEPC alleged that the steel majors increased the prices by more than three times across the different steel categories. During the period April 2007 - January 2008, steel prices were increased by an average of 10%. EEPC further alleged that if Rs. 3,000/- per ton increase in the month of February 2008 was taken into account, then the price increase of steel amounted to an astounding 20% across the board for the period April 2007 - February 2008 and the increase was sharper during the period September 2007 - February 2008.

4. It was alleged by EEPC that the rise in the steel price in India is much higher in comparison to the world prices. Further, it was stated that such sharp steel price increase was detrimental to the Indian engineering industry and the exporters of engineering goods especially those belonging to the small and medium scale sectors like critical engineering industry segments e.g. Hand Tools, Bicycles and parts, Auto components, Castings etc. Accordingly, it was requested that the MRTP Commission may take a look at the steel prices in India and initiate suitable measures to control the monopolistic pricing in the steel industry for the benefit of the small and medium scale industry, who are at the mercy of steel majors.

5. DG I&R initiated investigation against 34 steel companies in compliance of the order of investigation dated 14.03.2008 passed by the MRTP Commission. All the 34 companies filed their replies denying the allegations made against them in the news article as well as in EEPC's letter.

6. At this stage, consequent upon the repeal of the MRTP Act, the matter stood transferred to the Commission under section 66 (6) of the Act.

Directions to the DG

7. The Commission after considering the entire material available on record vide its order dated 18.06.2010 opined that their existed a prima facie case and accordingly, directed the Director General (DG) to cause an investigation to be made into the matter and to submit a report.

8. The DG, after receiving the directions from the Commission, investigated the matter and submitted an investigation report dated 31.05.2011 to the Commission on 01.06.2011.

Investigation by the DG

9. The investigation by the DG concentrated on four major primary steel manufacturers, two each from public and private sectors, viz. SAIL, RINL, Tata Steel Limited (TSL) and JSW Steel Limited (JSW). Further, the investigation process was restricted to find out their conduct in the pricing of HR coils and HR Plates (Flat Products) & Bars and Rods (Long Products), which comprise of around 60% of total non-alloy steel production. The scope of investigations covered the period from April, 2007 to March, 2010.

10. For the