Shine P Sasidhar vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 53B of the Competition Act, 2002 challenging the impugned order dated 22.01.2024 passed in Case No.38/2022 whereby the Ld. Commission has held there is no violation of Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 regarding abuse of dominant position of the enterprise by the Respondent.

The brief facts of the case are as under:

i) In the year 1967 the Kerala State Government notified Quilon-Pumpa route under the Scheme u/s 68Dof the Motor Vehicle Act, 1939;

ii) in the year 2018 private vehicle parking was prohibited at Pampa;

iii) in the year 2021 entry to contract carriages was restricted to Pumpa and Yatris contract carriages including all India tourist permit buses trip were ordered to be terminated at Nilakkal Station, far away from the starting point of the pilgrimage;

iv) according to the appellant, in the year 2022, Respondent Corporation started charging allegedly exorbitant charges, without providing adequate and efficient service to Yatrees, a clear abuse of its monopoly and dominant position;

v) On 01.12.2022, the Appellant filed information before Commission complaining about violation of Section 4 of Competition Act by the

vi) On 22.01.2024, the Ld. Commission passed the impugned order finding that there is no violation of Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002; hence this appeal.

The learned counsel for the appellant argues  it is a clear case of abuse of dominant position. It is alleged that the Respondent got approved fare stages and though the actual travel distance for the passengers is of 18 Kms from Nilakkal to Pumpa but to charge more, the Respondent charge flatly from their depot to the end point which is of 22 Km. In addition to fare charge the Respondent is also charging as Superfast charges, which is again 25% over and above the normal fast passenger charges and 120% more than the circular service charges. It is further argued the Respondent also charges Ghat section charges of 25% above the superfast charges and in addition to these charges, 30% is charged as festive charges by the Respondent, thus the Respondent is misusing its dominant position.

We have perused the impugned order of CCI which held as under:-

The Commission has perused the Information and other material available on record. It appears that the Informant is primarily aggrieved by the exclusivity granted to KSRTC by the Government of Kerala by way of notification for operating buses on the Nilakkal Pamba route to reach Sabarimala temple as well as charging of exorbitant fares from passengers on the said route. This has been alleged to be in contravention of provisions of Section 4 of the Act.

With regard to grant of exclusivity to KSRTC for operating on certain routes, the Commission notes from the submission of KSRTC that the same has been done by the Government of Kerala, in exercise of powers conferred under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for providing adequate, economical and properly coordinated passenger road transport service in the public interest. Such grant of exclusivity to KSRTC is a policy decision of the Government of Kerala and may not be considered as anticompetitive in the facts and circumstances of this case. With regard to the allegation of charging excessive fares, the Commission notes that the fares are fixed by KSRTC in accordance with the Notification dated 30.04.2022. The Commission also notes that the said notification is applicable to both nationalized and non-nationalized routes and has provisions for enhancement of rate of fares for: (a) Ghat roads and; (b) during the festival occasions as mentioned in the schedule appended to the said notification. The Commission further notes that the fares on per kilometer basis are being charged on a uniform basis as per the said notification by both public and private operators.

Against the aforesaid backdrop, the Commission is of the opinion that since there appears no discernible competition concern in the matter, it may not be appropriate to delve into allegations of abuse of dominant position.

In view of the foregoing, prima-facie, no case of contravention of Section 4 of the Act is made out in the facts, circumstances and allegations levelled in the case and the matter is ordered to be closed forthwith under Section 26(2) of the Act. Consequently, no case for grant of relief as sought under Section 33 of the Act arises in the matter.

We have also perused the notification dated 30th April, 2022 which in fact was published on the representations having been received by the Government of Kerala from various organisations representing the private stage carriage operators that, fares for stage carriages in the State be revised in view of the rise in the price of diesel and other factors which affect the operational cost since the last revisions effected on the 3rd day of July, 2020. Admittedly the matter was referred to Justice M. Ramachandran Committee constituted  on  19th  August,  2010  for  advising  the  Government  on  fare revision, amongst other things and it submitted its report on 27th January, 2022 after considering the situation in the wake of the hike in the price of diesel and other operational costs in the bus industry and the rates as are allegedly challenged before us are all mentioned and fixed by the notification.

Admittedly the fare(s) which are the subject matter of challenge before us are fixed as per the notification and are in exercise of the powers conferred under the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act for providing adequate, economical and properly coordinated passenger road transport service in the public interest. The Commission has duly noted the fares on per kilometre basis are being charged on a uniform basis as per the said notification by both public and private operators and we agree with the Ld. CCI to say that this is a matter of public policy and that there is no discernible competition concern in the matter and there is no case of contravention of Section 4 of the Act. Even otherwise, as per news reports filed on record, the High Court of Kerala has from time to time expressed its concerns about better road transport facilities to the pilgrims. For reasons aforesaid we find no merit in the appeal and we are not inclined to upset a reasoned order passed by the Ld. CCI. The appeal thus has no force and it is dismissed.

Pending applications are also disposed of.