Case No. 18 of 2013. Case: Shri Vineet Kumar Vs Ministry of Civil Aviation. Competition Commision of India
| Case Number | Case No. 18 of 2013 |
| Judges | Ashok Chawla Chairperson, H.C. Gupta, Member (G), Dr. Geeta Gouri, Member (GG), Anurag Goel, Member (AG), M.L. Tayal, Member (T) and Shiv Narayan Dhingra, Member (D) |
| Issue | Competition Act, 2002 - Sections 19(1)(a), 2(h), 26(2), 4 |
| Citation | 2013 CompLR 702 (CCI) |
| Judgement Date | August 16, 2013 |
| Court | Competition Commision of India |
Judgment:
Order under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002
-
The present information has been filed by Shri Vineet Kumar ('the informant') who claims to be a public spirited citizen to protect and promote the interests of the passengers who use air transport services in India under section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 ('the Act') against Ministry of Civil Aviation ('the opposite party'/MOCA) alleging inter alia contravention of the provisions of section 4 of the Act. It is averred in the information that MOCA vide its order dated 31.10.2012 constituted a committee named as 'the Aircraft Acquisition Committee (AAC)' to consider and examine the applications/proposals for providing air transport services and applications/proposals for permitting import or acquisition of aircraft for various purposes and also to consider proposals for initial NOC for flying training institutes, etc. The informant has alleged that all the members of AAC are the officers of the units/divisions of MOCA and there is no representation from the other stake holders, particularly the private air transport service providers. It has been alleged by the informant that such a composition of the Committee, which is loaded overwhelmingly in favour of MOCA, is against all cannons of fair play.
-
Referring to the terms of reference of the AAC, the informant submits that it examines and appraises applications/proposals from the air transport capacity perspective after considering the air traffic demand, safety, security, financial commercial and other relevant aspects of the proposal to ensure orderly growth of air transport services. After examination and appraisal, the AAC makes appropriate recommendations on the various categories of proposals.
-
It has been alleged by the informant that the guidelines prescribed for the AAC by MOCA are clearly violative of the provisions of section 4 of the Act. It has been alleged that MOCA being the regulator as well as the provider of air transport services through its units/division, viz. AAI and Air India, has farmed these guidelines imposing unfair terms in complete disregard of basic principles of the competition law and thereby severely limiting and restricting the provisions of services and market therefor. These guidelines also have the result of the denial of market access to the willing enterprises. Further, it is alleged that MOCA by so hindering the freedom of trade is depriving the consumers of quality and...
To continue reading
Request your trial