New Delhi, February 9 The Delhi High Court on Monday sought the opinion of the Competition Commission of India on a petition filed by the Basketball Federation of India against its order directing an investigation against the Federation for allegedly abusing its "dominant position" and engaging in anti-competitive activities.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav issued notice on the petition, as well as the Federation's plea seeking a stay on the order, and listed it for hearing on March 10.
Senior advocate Vaibhav Gaggar, appearing for the petitioner, asserted that "a regulator cannot be regulated," and that the Federation is a national sports federation. He argued that the CCI acted outside its jurisdiction when it passed the order directing investigation by the Director General on November 25, 2025.
He sought a stay on the order, claiming that it has "global ramifications."
The CCI acted on this matter following a complaint by Elite Pro Basketball Private Limited (EPBL). It took cognizance of the "information," dated March 11, 2024, on August 21, 2025.
The complainant alleged that the Federation's "refusal to deal/denial of market access" and "restraint on players" from participating in un-affiliated competitions was in violation of the Competition Act.
In the petition, the Federation stated that in 2022, EPBL had shown interest in becoming the organizing partner of a professional basketball league at the initial stage.
However, it neither provided the requested roadmap nor participated in the tender process despite a specific invitation, and the Federation was duty-bound to find another organizing partner for the league, the plea added.
The plea further stated that the Federation acted as a regulator when it dealt with EPBL's request for affiliation/recognition and cautioned players against participation in unrecognised competitions, and the CCI cannot act like a "super-regulator" in this matter.
"The process to find organizing partners through competitive and transparent bidding process and generate finances for the cause of the sport falls in the realm of policy/regulatory decisions and not an economic activity to attract the provisions of the Competition Act," the petition said.
"Warning players against participation in un-recognised leagues is a regulatory and a policy decision and does not amount to anti-competitive exclusive distribution agreement or restraint on services of players amounting to abuse of dominance," it added.
The petition submitted that the CCI has erroneously held that a prima facie case of alleged contravention of sections 3 & 4 of the Competition Act was made out in this case, and thus, directed investigation by the Director General.
