MRF LTD Vs. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these three Writ Petitions, the Petitioner challenges Orders, dtd. 1/11/2019 (in short, First Order/Order No.1), 26/8/2020 (in short, Second Order/Order No.2) and Notice, dtd. 2/2/2024. Consent of the parties, including specifically of Respondent Counsel, has been sought and obtained, for final disposal of the matter at this stage.

(2.) The genesis of the matter is a reference that had been made by the Directorate of State Transport, Haryana/R6 under Sec. 19(1)(b) of the Competition Act, 2002 (in short 'Act') as against JK Tyres & Industries Limited (in short 'JK Tyres'). An order came to be passed on 1/11/2019 by the Competition Commission of India (in short 'R1) directing investigation to be made into the matter and for submission of an Investigation Report within a period of 60 days from date of receipt of that order.

(3.) It is notable that only JK Tyres was arrayed as opposite party in that reference. The reference was made based on the following factual pattern. R6 had invited online tenders on 21/9/2018 for purchase of new steel radial tyres of different sizes and specifications. The tyre sets were required at 25 different destinations to replace worn-out tyres on the buses run by Haryana Roadways. There was only one bidder, i.e., JK Tyres. Technical and financial scrutiny was conducted and the matter was thereafter referred to the High Power Purchase Committee (in short, HPPC) since the procurement value exceeded a sum of Rs.1.00 crore.