Links has Vinod Dhall (former chairman CCI)
JSA has Manas Chaudhry (member CCI and involved in drafting) and now Vaish has former registrar of CCI...

looks like this is the way forward for Indian firms to grow theri competition practice. is there any other Indian firm that has hired former officials of CCI?

Luthra has G R Bhatia, formerly Additional Director General, CCI. There are not many ex-CCI folks on the loose, so tough luck for other law firms :-)

Amarchand has a few people who are ex-OFT (UK competition commission) and I believe Pallavi Shroff was part of the committee that drafted the Competition Act. Also, I received an invitation to (but unfortunately could not attend) a seminar series held by them in Delhi and get regular well put together updates on comp law from them. Very slick.

It would be interesting to see how these ex-CCI staffers without the intricate knowledge of the competition law and competition economics would deal with complex issues of defining the markets and assessing the appreciablity of adverse effects in the relevant markets in India

I totally agree with ABC. I was on a panel discussion with some of these gentlemen. While they are fully aware of procedure [rest of comment moderated as was unfortunately bordering on defamatory.]

This one I must reply. The interviewer who published this news did not mention my qualification . I am one of the few Indian lawyers( only 2 or 3 , to my knowledge ) who holds a post graduate diploma in "Economics for Competition Law" from Kings College London . My articles on "Predicting Business Cartels: Some Lessons for India" may be read in the "Competition Law Reports" published by Manupatra and in Consumer Law Journal. I have tought the economic concepts on market power and determination of market definition in some prestigious instititutions , including the ICAI, and recently in ILI. The writer is welcome to meet me to satisfy him on my understanding these concepts.
M M Sharma.

Why this great rush for competition commission bureaucrats?

What work has the commission done of late?

What parts of the Competition Act of India have been "notified"?

The act has a "strking resemblance" to the EU directives on competition (and the UK Competition Act). So much for Indian lawyers claiming a hand in its drafting!

And pray, whatever happened to the good old MRTPC?

To Chris,

I'll try to defend the 'mute' Commission as in India or any where in the World, the regulators can not join issues with bloggers!

1. The Competition Commission of India(CCI) , of which I happened to be a part for over 2 years, did what was the most difficult thing to do-undertaking "competition advocacy" without having enforcement powers! It prepared itself by training its skeltal staff of only 6 officers and drafted regulations under the Competition Act, 2002 , after its amendment in 2007 (necessitated due to a proxy PIL filed by some vested intersets in Supreme Court) , in a record time of one year , thus keeping it ready to commence enforcement as and when notified by the Government. Of these, as was expected the draft regulations relating to Mergers and Acquistions recived maximum responses from Law Firms, including overseas Bar associations ,such as the the American Bar Associations etc,the Buisness chambers such as the FICCI,CII, ASSOCHAM etc. but with few exceptions , none of the commentators had done home work and the comments were vague bordering only on the 210 days mandatory waiting period. No comments were received on the General Regulations, the Transaction of Buisness regulations and the Engaggment of experts regulations( in which I happened to contribute maximum) though theses remained on the website of the Commission for over 6 months before being notified. The CCI undertook as amny as 60 Seminars and workshops , including around 10 National workshops , which were widely particepated and it took out enough advoocacy literature in the form of advovacy booklets on main competition issues such as "cartels',"IPR" Abuse of Dominace"etc. It also got the Bar Council of India, the Regulator of the legal profession in India agree to agree to include "competition law" as an optional subject for LL.B course in all universities in India by an amendment in the Advocate Act, 1961. I can go on and on . But I will pause and ask anyone who knows the State of our Regulators , has any other Regulators done so much ground work with such skeltal staff even before they commence operation. I am proud of our achievments.

2. Only sections 3 and 4 of the Competition act,relating to anti-competitive agreements (Both horizontal and vertical agreements) and Abuse of dominant position by enterprises have been notified from 20 May 2009. And yes, you are right , these two sections resemble Article 81 and 82 of the Treaty of Rome, which is the main source of the entire jurisprudence in the European commission on these main parts of competition law and policy (apart form Article 85 relating to mergers) . But there are very subtle differences which make these sections border close to the American concepts of the law , such as dominace of enterprises is not based on market share alone , unlike in Europe .
And I have not heard any India lawyer claiming having "Drafted" a new Act! By the way Europe also borrowed heavily from the Americal anti-trust Law in 60's .
3. The govt has recently notified Section 66 of the Competition act . This , in effect, repeals the MRTP Act, 1969 . The MRTP Commission can not now take up any new case/complaint and it will get dissolved in 2 years time under this "sun-set provision" to complete the pending inquiries.
MMS

@MM Sharma,

Glad to know the CCI have been burning the midnight oil.

There has been the unhappy practice in India of regulators in an ever-expanding list of sectors being a fertile resting ground for retired bureaucrats or sinecures for whom the govt wish to favour.

More often than not these regulators side with the govt (see what is happening in the electricty sector) or are blatantly biased. That's when they are not hopelessly bogged down with procedure and plain red tape.

Incidentally, the present govt. has a minister who was only recently the chief election commissioner!! Talk about impartial referees ...

(Have they ever heard of the dictum: justice must not only be done ...but seen to be done).

If anyone from the CCI is reading this, here is an "uncompetitive practice" worth investigating:

Recently I went to buy a mosquito repellant device ...and the ones in the market are not inter-changeable. So if I buy a machine of brand X, I cannot use brand Y's refill liquid repellant.

I believe that is an unfair "tie-in" ....if I have bought a camera by brand XT, why cannot I use film belonging to a rival, XR?

Dear Mr. Sharma,

The work done by the CCI in this short span of time is really commendable, but we have to wait and watch as the time goes by, to see how much teeth the CCI will have in comparison to the MRTP Commission.

Further, it is a pleasure to know that Vaish Associates is looking to grow in the right direction. I had worked there as an intern previously and has a fine experience.

Mr. Sharma, I would be happy to be given an opportunity to work with your team at Vaish. Kindly let me know whether Mrs Neerja Kapoor is still the HR or has someone else joined in her place, I did try and contact her, without success.

Regards,

Debjyoti Sarkar
BBA.LLB

NEERJA has resigned...

i worked in vaish long time back and am still in touch with some ppl there.it was a closely held family firm then. it should still be the same...i wonder if the designation given here is correct...the magazine should check.. if it is correct then i am glad that the firm is opening up

[Many thanks for your comment - you are correct and we apologise for the mistake. M M Sharma is currently "Head-Competition Law & Practice", not partner as erroneously stated. -Ed]

I met Mr.MM Sharma last month....he is a very learned man & a good human being...Vaish is actually lucky to have him as their competition head....He's a person with International exposure in Competition law.....
I have also read his new Competition bulletin...which is very impressive

Regards

Vaibhav Choukse
LLM (Kings College London)

@Editor
If you are aware that he is not the partner, then the title of the article should be ammended to suitably reflect the same. the title is false and misleading and shows that the magazine has not done its research properly before printing an article. Moreover, if you accept the error, then as a gesture, you should ammend the title of the article...

[Thanks for pointing this out, we had accidentally ommitted to correct the headline of this story. -Ed]

The practice is 'uncompetitive' only if after a market study it can be established that the enterprise is dominant in the market or the practice of tie in is causing adverse effect in the market which is appreciable. But a complaint could be made to the CCI to initiate the investigation, now that the provisions of the Competition Act, on abuse of dominance have been notified.