The Competition Commission has dismissed complaints against Bangalore International Airport, GVK Power & Infrastructure and Airports Authority of India about alleged anti-competitive practices in ground handling services.
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has rejected the complaint, saying the allegations "do not hold any ground".
The complaint was filed by Turbo Aviation which provides ground handling service to various domestic airlines and services for chartering of aircraft.
As per the complainant, Bangalore International Airport (OP 1) being the airport operator, refused to allow self-handling of ground handling services (GHS) to Turbo Aviation for its TruJet flight operations citing security problems and congestion at the airport.
GVK Power & Infrastructure (OP 2) was also alleged to abuse its dominant position as it holds 43 per cent stake in Bangalore International Airport.
The complaint also alleged that Airports Authority (OP 3), was into an agreement with Bangalore International Airport and ensured that the airlines were prevented from self-handling of GHS and were made to avail the services of Airports Authority or any other services provider nominated by it.
For this case, the regulator considered "market for the provision of ground handling services at Kempegowda International Airport in Bengaluru", as the relevant market.
According to CCI, GVK Power & Infrastructure and Bangalore International Airport (Opposite Party or OP Group) is in a dominant position, but dominance is not a violation unless it is misused.
Further, the watchdog said it was not "clear as to how OP (Opposite Party) 1 is leveraging its dominant position in this market to protect the GHS market."
"... The Commission observes that the information does not disclose any kind of agreement between OP 1 and OP 3 which can be termed as anti-competitive," the regulator said in the matter of Airports Authority.
Accordingly, CCI said it is of the "opinion that no prima facie case of contravention of the provisions of either section 3 or section 4 of the Act is made out against OPs in the instant matter".
Section 3 of the Competition Act pertains to anti-competitive practices while section 4 is related to abuse of dominant position.
