PRAN MEHRA Vs. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge is laid to orders dated 17.6.2014 and 31.7.2014 passed by the Competition Commission of India (in short CCI) in Case No.13/2013. The petitioners have approached this Court by way of a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India on a singular ground, which is, that the process commenced under Section 48 of the Act Competition Act, 2002 (in short the Act) is premature, in view of the fact that the CCI has not returned any finding as to the contravention of the Act, as yet.

(2.) THE contention of the petitioner is that only after a finding is returned vis - -vis contravention, if any, alleged to have been committed by the company, by the name of, VeriFone India Sales Private Limited (in short VeriFone) that any process can be commenced against the petitioners, on the purported ground, that they were, key -persons engaged by the aforementioned company.

(3.) MR . Ramji Srinivsan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner has placed before me orders dated 9.10.2014 and 13.11.2014 passed by the CCI. Broadly, a perusal of the order would show that the CCI has reserved orders with regard to the matter in issue and has heard arguments both of the informant as well as the opposite party, i.e. Verifone, pursuant to the submission of the report by the Director General Investigations (D.G.I.). Mr. Ramji Srinivasan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the process under Section 48 would commence only in the eventuality of CCI returning a finding against the company under Section 27 of the Act. He says that it is only then, that the petitioner would know what the contravention is; which according to him is the stage when the petitioners can be called upon to disclose their defence, as to their role in the contravention.