Fair rivalry please: India's antitrust watchdog needs to get its mojo back

Mint

6 hours ago

Binoy Prabhakar The tardy record of the Competition Commission of India (CCI) on major cases is a worry. Case delays entail larger economic risks that we must minimize by empowering this regulator. Fair business practices must prevail. The Competition Commission of India was established in 2009 to rein in the misuse of market power by powerful companies and protect consumer interests.
Gift this article
In 2012, Dr LH Hiranandani Hospital in Mumbai denied a couple, Manu Jain and Saurabh Kumar, the right to choose their preferred stem cell banker. The couple did not turn to the judiciary or even a consumer court for justice. Instead, they approached the Competition Commission of India (CCI). About a year later, India's fair-trade regulator fined the hospital ₹ 3.8 crore for anti-competitive and anti-consumer practices.
In 2012, Dr LH Hiranandani Hospital in Mumbai denied a couple, Manu Jain and Saurabh Kumar, the right to choose their preferred stem cell banker. The couple did not turn to the judiciary or even a consumer court for justice. Instead, they approached the Competition Commission of India (CCI). About a year later, India's fair-trade regulator fined the hospital ₹ 3.8 crore for anti-competitive and anti-consumer practices.
The CCI, established in 2009 to rein in the misuse of market power by powerful companies and protect consumer interests, was then the new sheriff in town. Consumers and companies could seek speedy justice against any abuse of dominance by enterprises or exploitation by competitors. The CCI has since then busted cartels across a raft of sectors ranging from entertainment to cement. It has raided companies suspected of foul play. Any merger and acquisition (M&A) worth its salt needs the CCI's approval.
Also Read: Competition: We must raise the CCI's tooth-to-tail ratio
That's not all. The CCI seems to have the government's backing. Finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman has in the past backed the regulator to police American Big Tech companies and asked it to stay 'proactively alert" to ensure healthy competition.
Yet, the CCI is now a fading star in India's regulatory constellation, hobbled by loads of important pending cases. Take a look:
A probe was launched in January 2020 against e-commerce companies to examine allegations of preferential treatment of certain sellers and deep discounting practices that could be predatory. More than five years later, the case seems to be going nowhere.
In April 2022, food delivery firms Zomato and Swiggy came under the CCI's scrutiny for exclusivity clauses and platform neutrality issues. A final order is pending.
The CCI had opened multiple cases against tech giant Google. An investigation of its Android licensing practices, Play Store billing system and Android TV dominance is more than four years old. The CCI settled the Android TV case in April 2025, but the wider inquiry into advertising practices and Play Store service charges is unresolved.
Although an investigation against Apple was completed in July last year, the CCI is yet to issue a final ruling. The complaint dates back to 2021.
Also Read: Google's settlement with CCI over Android TVs: A win-win?
An investigation into quick commerce companies such as Blinkit, Instamart and Zepto, which potentially impacts scores of mom-and-pop stores across the country, is moving at a snail's pace. Last December, the CCI raided the premises of alcohol companies Pernod Ricard and AB InBev to investigate complaints of price collusion in Telangana. Again, that case is hanging. What about its probes into steel and cement companies that face charges of violating antitrust rules? Same story.
It is not hard to see why rulings on high-profile cases are delayed. The CCI has long been operating with a severe staff shortage. For example, the director general's office, which is tasked with fact-finding as part of CCI investigations, is understaffed. Only 113 of the CCI's 195 sanctioned posts were filled as of 31 March 2024, 'indicating a significant vacancy rate," as observed by a parliamentary panel that reviews financial matters of the government in a report published on 11 August.
The CCI still has a knack for making news, no doubt. Its crackdowns against Asian Paints and the advertising industry are recent examples of the flutter it can cause.
But what about a final closure in critical cases? That is anybody's guess.
Not all delays are the CCI's fault. The regulator faces the same challenge that many in India seeking justice are up against—a plodding judiciary. The Delhi and Karnataka high courts, for example, have stayed multiple CCI investigations, including the case against Flipkart and Amazon.
Granted, antitrust investigations can be time-consuming, but the pile-up of delayed cases is worrying. The CCI website shows that it has a disposal rate of 90% for antitrust cases. But its record on significant cases, especially those that affect consumers, is poor. In 2022, the CCI launched an inquiry against hospitals, promising to crack down on inflated prices of medicines and medical devices. That case is also gathering dust.
Not long ago, CCI prioritized the susceptibility of public tenders to anti-competitive practices. Not anymore. Can an institution saddled with existing cases be expected to pursue new ones with due rigour?
Also Read: Why CCI matters for protecting customers from digital players
Delays weaken the regulation of business practices, which hurts consumers and new players by failing to check the ill effects of cartelization and market dominance in many fields. This, at a time when fair-trade regulators globally are trying to keep pace with speedy changes in tech industries like AI.
India's government should fast-track the appointment of CCI officers. Legislative reforms are also needed. The CCI must be empowered to issue interim orders or launch market studies that have statutory backing. The settlement mechanism used in the Google Android TV case this April could be broadly adopted to speed up enforcement. The CCI must resolve critical and time-sensitive cases speedily.
India's competition regulator has a vital role in ensuring markets remain fair, transparent and competitive. But in the absence of systemic reforms, institutional capacity and judicial support, it risks becoming a toothless watchdog—slow to act, easy to bypass and at risk of irrelevance.
With India's economy growing fast and new-age monopolies emerging, the case for empowering the CCI and holding it accountable has never been stronger.
The author is chief content officer, Hindustan Times Digital. Topics You May Be Interested In