No case: CCI closes case against Goa taxi unions over anti-competitive practices
The Competition Commission of India, which in 2018 took up a case on its very own against Goa’s taxi unions for allegedly resorting to anti-aggressive practices and cartelisation to deny access to app-based aggregators, closed it on June 22. It mentioned lack of proof and stated no case was made out for violation of Section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002 (abuse of dominant position).
The regulator took up the case based on newspaper reviews. It additionally stated a change.org petition addressed to the Goa chief minister in 2017 for permitting the app-based taxi aggregator services in the nation because of the “dismal state of affairs of public transport”.
The Commission in 2018 directed its director-general to investigate the problem and post a report. In its intervening time order, the regulator stated the “behavior of taxi unions in now no longer permitting any app-primarily based totally carrier companies in the State of Goa, become placing a restraint on offerings primarily based totally on era and proscribing the competition”.
The director-trendy submitted a report in January 2020, saying there were no fare meters and organised groups of taxi operators in Goa control the rates as well as the routes”. The report added tourists in Goa have been being overcharged. It said the government introduced GoaMiles, a taxi phone app, “subsidising the taxi fares by nearly half of what one would pay to a taxi driver off the street.”
The report said the unions not only organised demonstrations and strikes but also physically intimidated various other stakeholders. It added anti-competitive practices reports were correct.
The North Goa Tourist Taxi Owners Association contested the report announcing it was completely based on selective newspaper reviews and that “not even an attempt was made to consider and to analyze equally.” It pointed to the exclusion of “‘applicable material” in the shape of news articles, studies, which reflected “poorly on the conduct of those app-based taxi aggregators”.
The operators maintained they can't be faulted for democratically and peacefully voicing their opposition against the access of players, which at once impacted their livelihood. They talked about that regardless of their so-called anti-competitive lobbying with the government, the latter formulated a coverage for the aggregators. The coverage permits the aggregators to operate and to have dynamic pricing.
The Commission then ruled the actions of the taxi operators do not amount to an anti-aggressive exercise as described in the Competition Act, 2002. It stated the authorities’s choice to permit the aggregators in Goa. “It is apparent that despite the competition, the State of Goa does not seem to have acceded to or conceded to the demands of the Ops (taxi operators), and the policy permitting entry of app-based taxi aggregators was eventually notified.”
