The matter stemmed from a probe initiated by the CCI on a complaint filed by the NRAI in 2021, which alleged that food delivery apps Swiggy and Zomato were indulging in anti-competitive practices.
The Director General (Investigation) of the CCI had earlier conducted a probe into these allegations.
The DG’s findings were compiled into a report that contained sensitive and confidential business information submitted by Swiggy and Zomato. Therefore, the DG submitted two versions of its report, a redacted version and an unredacted version. The unredacted version of the report retained the confidential information concerning Swiggy and Zomato.
The CCI later created a confidential ring of persons who would have access to the unredacted version of the DG’s report.
However, by an order passed on April 24 this year, the CCI allowed the NRAI’s representatives also to become part of this confidential ring.
Swiggy objected to this move, claiming that the CCI’s April 24 order was passed without hearing Swiggy. It, therefore, filed a petition before the Karnataka High Court to set aside the CCI’s decision.
Swiggy argued that the CCI order was bereft of any reasons to support its decision to allow NRAI’s representatives access to Swiggy’s confidential data.
During the last hearing of the matter, Justice Krishna Kumar had suggested that the CCI could reconsider the matter after hearing Swiggy, since the primary grievance was that Swiggy’s objections were not heard.
Source: Barandbench
