The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed UltraTech Cement's appeal challenging the Competition Commission of India's (CCI) decision to allow the Builders Association of India (BAI) to join its investigation into alleged cartelisation and price manipulation by grey cement manufacturers. According to the latest reports from Business Standard, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia upheld the December 2023 order of a single judge, who had refused to interfere with the anti-trust body's decision to make BAI a party to the proceedings. The court established a significant legal precedent by ruling that 'any person, entity or party with sufficient interest can participate in CCI proceedings if such participation aids the case or serves the public interest'. The bench emphasized that such impleadment would aid the Commission in arriving at a correct and just conclusion in the proceedings, noting that proceedings under the Competition Act are intended to protect competition and consumers and are not ordinary adversarial litigation.
The CCI investigation began in 2019 after receiving several complaints alleging that grey cement manufacturers were acting together to manipulate prices and cartelize the market. As reported by Business Standard, the case arose from complaints received by the CCI between December 2018 and May 2019 alleging that the conduct of certain cement manufacturers had adversely affected competition. One of the complaints was filed by BAI, an association representing over 20,000 builders and infrastructure developers that purchase cement. The CCI subsequently started an investigation, which included searches at the premises of five cement manufacturers, including UltraTech, in December 2020. BAI later sought to participate in the proceedings, but the CCI rejected its first request in December 2021. After a favourable ruling, the CCI allowed BAI to present its views and made it a party to the proceedings on 5 July, 2023. The CCI stated that BAI's participation could help conduct a more meaningful investigation, given that builders are among the largest consumers of cement.
UltraTech challenged the CCI's decision before the high court, arguing that BAI should not have been made a party because it was only an informant and was not itself under investigation. According to Business Standard, the company also raised concerns that BAI's participation could give builders access to commercially sensitive information submitted by cement manufacturers during the investigation. The company specifically argued that the CCI's order was passed without giving the company an opportunity to oppose BAI's impleadment and contended that the CCI could not effectively review its earlier decision rejecting BAI's request. The court rejected these arguments, holding that CCI regulations allow the competition regulator to permit participation where it is satisfied that the applicant has a substantial interest in the outcome and that its participation is necessary in the public interest. The court noted that BAI had a substantial interest after representing builders who were directly affected by anti-competitive conduct and being a major consumer of cement.
According to CNBC TV18, UltraTech Cement's shares were trading 0.80% lower at ₹11,086 on Tuesday, in a largely weak market. UltraTech is India's largest cement manufacturer, with its market share estimated at over 20%. Its domestic grey-cement capacity stood at 200.1 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) as of April 2026. The company's domestic grey-cement capacity represents a significant portion of India's cement manufacturing capacity, making the ongoing investigation particularly relevant to its operations. The court's ruling establishes important precedent for future competition cases, emphasizing that proceedings under the Competition Act serve public interest and are not ordinary adversarial litigation.
