The commission, in a preliminary view, said the DDA was found to be abusing its dominant position by formulating unfair terms of agreement, through disproportionate pricing, and delaying the allotment of flats. The commission observed that the issue requires an examination of the overall conduct of the DDA in dealing with the buyers under the scheme. Considering that DDA is a public body, the commission noted that “public bodies need to ensure that their conduct is compliant with competition law”. The informant had applied for a residential plot under a DDA plot scheme in 1981. DDA did not conduct the draw of lots and no allotment was done for a period of 31 years.

Source: Mint January 25, 2017 12:35 UTC