ST MICHAELS SCHOOL Vs. STATE
MONO POLIES AND RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES COMMISSION
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE difference of opinion between two learned Members (Mr. N. C. Gupta and Mr. Sardar Ali) on certain points had led to the reference of this matter before me. Mr. N. C. Gupta was for discharge of notice while Mr. Sardar Ali was of the view that the respondent should be directed to make reservations in favour of students belonging to different economic backgrounds.
(2.) Three issues were framed by the Commission in this enquiry. These were :
(1) Whether the enquiry is not maintainable for the reasons given in the preliminary objections and also whether the Commission lacks jurisdiction to pass any order under the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act ? or
(2) Whether the respondent committed restrictive trade practices and/or monopolistic trade practice as alleged in the notice of enquiry ?
(3) If the answer to issue No. 2 be in the affirmative, then whether the said restrictive trade practices and/or monopolistic trade practice is permissible under any gateways within the meaning of Section 38 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act ?
There was no difference of opinion between the Members with regard to the first issue, both holding that the Commission did not lack jurisdiction to entertain the enquiry. On the second issue, however, the two Members differed in certain respects which shall be adverted to below.
(3.) THE facts leading to the enquiry have been elaborated by both members and I do not propose to repeat the same except to highlight some broad features.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.