In the formative years of the Competition Commission of India (CCI), the hearings were markedly different from the traditional courtroom setting. There was an absence of theatrical display, no elevated platforms, and a lack of excessive formalities. Instead, lawyers, Commission members, officers, and economists gathered around a table, engaging in discussions that were often messy but sincere. This environment was a fertile ground for young competition lawyers. The legal framework was new, the regulatory body was in its nascent stages, and the legal bar was just beginning to establish itself. Many practitioners were transitioning from other areas, bringing only a few years of practice to this burgeoning field. There was a palpable curiosity about due process, market definitions, evidence, economics, and the institutional design of the CCI.
The Architect of Consensus
At the heart of these proceedings was Dhanendra Kumar, the inaugural Chairperson of the CCI. His role in shaping the history of Indian economic regulation is undeniable. However, his legacy extends beyond the title. Kumar brought to the Commission an air of calmness, practicality, and a profound instinct for building consensus. During hearings, questions could come from any direction, creating a dynamic and sometimes chaotic atmosphere. Kumar, with his gentle “dekhiye,” would often restore order, simplify complex questions, and guide the discussion to its core issues. His approach made intimidating topics more approachable and solvable. Furthermore, he ensured that young lawyers felt heard, fostering an environment of shared learning rather than confrontation.
A Culture of Engagement and Dialogue
Kumar’s most notable institutional contribution was the introduction of merger control in India. At the time, the landscape was fraught with uncertainty. Businesses were apprehensive, lawyers were cautious, and the government required persuasion. Kumar’s method of introducing the merger control regime was collaborative. He invited members of the bar to contribute to shaping the regulations, emphasizing the need for a business-friendly yet regulatory-compliant system. This collaborative effort laid the groundwork for a culture of continuous improvement and dialogue within Indian merger control.
Enforcement and Legitimacy
Kumar’s impact was further solidified by the landmark DLF decision, which imposed a penalty of ₹630 crore. This decision brought the CCI to national attention, distinguishing it from the previous MRTP regime and underscoring its regulatory authority. While debates about the DLF case’s merits persist, its effect on the real estate sector and its agreements is undisputed. Kumar understood that for a regulator to command respect, it must earn it through accessibility, firmness, and independence.
Legacy Beyond Office
Even after leaving office, Kumar remained active in the field of competition law. He continued to write and advise on competition policy, chairing the National Competition Policy committee. His legacy is not only in regulations and policies but also in the values he instilled—listening, respect, and inclusivity. In his later years, he continued to be a source of inspiration and encouragement for many in the competition law community.
More Read
For those who had the privilege of working with him, Kumar’s influence extends beyond professional achievements. It is found in the everyday moments of mutual respect and the pursuit of common goals. His passing is felt deeply, but his contributions to Indian antitrust law and his enduring kindness will be remembered with gratitude.
