Application by an informant to recall CCI’s order which attained its finality, was a gross abuse of Law: CCI

Case Details: Pankaj Rai v. NIIT Ltd. - [2022] 142 taxmann.com 303 (CCI)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Ashok Kumar Gupta, Chairperson, Sangeeta Verma & Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi, Member
  • Ramji Srinivasan, Sr. Adv., Ms Dinoo Muthappa & Bikas Kumar Jha, Advs. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the an information was filed by the informant u/s 19 of the Competition Act, 2002 against ‘Opposite Party’ (OP), NIIT Ltd. alleging contravention of the provisions of sections 3 and 4 of the Act. Since, no prima facie case of contravention of either of the provisions of section 3 or 4 could be made out against the OP, the CCI closed the matters under the provisions of section 26(2) of the Act.

Thereafter, statutory appeals were filed against the said order, firstly before the Appellate Tribunal and subsequently before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which stood dismissed. Thus, having exhausted all possible legal avenues before every conceivable forum in the judicial hierarchy and having lost at every stage, the Informant moved the instant application seeking reopening of the issues decided by the CCI.

CCI Held

The CCI observed that the present information had not raised any new facts or cause of action on account of ‘fresh knowledge’. Further, the informant had raked up the stale issues which not only had been decided by the Commission but had also attained their finality.

The CCI held that the information was thoroughly misconceived, abusive and not maintainable. Further, the information had been filed in a desperate manner to overreach various previous orders passed by the Commission as well as the Appellate Tribunal and the Supreme Court.

The CCI, further also held that if such attempts were acceded to, there would be no end to litigation and the parties would remain perpetually in uncertain situations i.e. a scenario wholly against the public interest and the public policy. Therefore, the instant application filed by the informant was to be dismissed.

In view of the above, no case of contravention of provisions of section 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 could be made out against the OP.

List of Cases Referred to

• • Pankaj Rai v. Union of India [W.P. No. 42223 of 2017, dated 14-2-2018] (para 3)
  • Maj Pankaj Rai v. Union of India [Writ Appeal No. 456 of 2018, dated 31-12-2018] (para 4)
  • Maj Pankaj Rai v. Secretary, CCI [Civil Appeal No. 2967 of 2020, dated 12-10-2020] (para 7)
  • Maj Pankaj Rai v. Secretary, CCI [Review Petition (Civil) No. 1926 of 2020, dated 27-1-2021] (para 8).