On September 26, 2022, the DHC dismissed a writ petition brought before it by the Builders Association of India (‘Petitioner’) challenging the Order passed by the CCI rejecting the Petitioner’s prayer of impleadment as the informant in proceedings before the CCI. As background, the Petitioner had addressed a complaint to the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India alleging cartelisation by cement manufacturers, leading to abnormal increase in cement prices. The Petitioner contended that the CCI initiated investigation against the cement manufacturers based on the information provided by the Petitioner.^[1]

The Petitioner referred to Regulation 2(i) of the Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations, 2009 (‘General Regulations’) and contended that information provider is entitled to be impleaded as a party and prayed that a copy of the investigation report of the DG be provided to it to frame an effective and comprehensive opinion.

The CCI countered that (i) the investigation was not initiated solely at the behest of the complaint filed by the Petitioner and the Petitioner being the informant, cannot stake a position in an adversarial capacity; and (ii) it is upon the CCI/ DG’s discretion to implead parties which may have a direct interest in the investigation, or that can provide relevant information.

The DHC noted that the CCI on rejecting the application of impleadment had taken into consideration the fact that the proceedings before the DG were “at an advanced stage of investigation”. It was in that backdrop that the CCI had declined the request made by the Petitioner, and since the Petitioner is not prejudiced, it cannot claim to have a direct interest in the investigation process especially when it only stood in the shoes of the informant. The DHC also noted that the investigation report of the DG is now up for consideration before the CCI. At this stage, per Regulations 21 and 25 of the General Regulations, it becomes open to any party, person, or enterprise having a substantial interest in the outcome of proceedings or who can establish that its presence before the CCI is necessary for the public interest, to seek a right of audience before the CCI and to present its opinion for its consideration. This right is still available to the Petitioner and the DHC dismissed the petition with the liberty to the Petitioner to apply to the CCI under Regulation 25 of the General Regulations.

[1] W.P.(C) 8958/2022.