Now that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has been functional with a full time chairman and several members for about five months, there is little sense to keep the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC) alive.

The Centre must repeal the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (MRTP Act) at the earliest. What we now have is a dual mechanism to deal with competition issues and trade practices. This defeats the very purpose of enacting a modern competition law and putting in place a new mechanism to deal with anti-competitive and restrictive trade practices.

Indeed, anecdotal evidence suggests as much. The MRTPC continues to receive new cases, as much as 30 every month, adding to the backlog of some 2,000 cases. The relative ease to file a complaint before the MRTPC, in addition to the greater familiarity with that mechanism, is said to be the reason why complaints of monopolistic and restrictive trade practices continue to be filed before the MRTPC. Conversely, a fee of Rs 50,000 charged by the CCI to accept complaints of trade practices prejudicial to free play in the market helps keep out frivolous cases.

The government’s lethargic movement on repealing the MRTP Act perhaps has more to do with protecting the interest of those holding office at the MRTPC and others working there. The Competition Act (Section 66) provides for repeal of the MRTP Act and transfer of all undecided cases, other than those pertaining to unfair trade practices, to the CCI.

Cases pertaining to unfair trade practices are to be transferred to the National Commission constituted under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. It also dealt with severance and settlement of employees of the MRTPC — some are to be repatriated back to their cadre or department. The chairman and members are entitled to three months pay and allowances for premature termination. It is important the Centre moves quickly so as not to undermine the effectiveness of the CCI. Further, the role of the CCI needs to be widely publicised so that aggrieved parties move it for adjudication in contentious cases.