The High Court of Delhi (‘DHC’) on April 24, 2023, disposed off a writ petition filed by Alliance of Digital India Foundation (‘ADIF’).

Background

The CCI passed an order imposing a penalty and certain behavioral remedies (‘Remedies’), on October 25, 2022 on account of finding Google guilty of abusing its dominant position under Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. Subsequently, Google filed a compliance report before the CCI, declaring that it has complied with the Remedies. Later, ADIF, one of the complainants before the CCI, filed applications (‘Applications’) under Section 42 of the Competition Act before the CCI alleging non-compliance of the Remedies by Google. The CCI did not decide the Applications due to a lack of quorum.

DHC Proceedings

ADIF filed a writ petition before the DHC to direct the CCI to adjudicate on the Applications on the ground that Section 15 of the Competition Act states that no act or proceedings before the CCI would be invalidated by reason of any vacancy or defects in the constitution of the CCI. The DHC while disposing off the writ petition held that:

i.    Section 15 of the Competition Act contemplates two different functions of the CCI; “act”, and “proceedings”. “Proceedings” means the adjudicatory powers of the CCI, and “act” means the regulatory and administrative powers of the CCI. Therefore, a vacancy or any defect in the constitution of the CCI will not restrict the CCI from performing its adjudicatory functions;

ii.   Sections 8 of the Competition Act governs the composition and not the quorum of the CCI. There is no provision in the Competition Act that prescribes the minimum number of members that would constitute a valid quorum of the CCI to perform its adjudicatory functions; and

iii.  Section 22(3) of the Competition Act makes it clear that the “quorum” in the said provision is only applicable to the meetings, and not to the adjudicatory functions of the CCI. Hence, Section 22 is only in relation to the administrative functions.