The agenda for inclusive growth was working in last decade in India which the legislation intended to succeed not only faster growth but also ensures basic and certain improvement in the quality of life of the people, especially marginalized section. The aim of the Niti Commission to introduce the concept of inclusive growth is that bringing these excluded sections of the society into the mainstream of the developing society so that they are able to secure the benefits of faster economic growth is the kind of ‘inclusion’ which is being intended in the concept of inclusive growth. The term ‘Inclusive Growth’ has been defined by various different scholars and academician as well as by organizations. The dictionary meaning of the term “inclusive” is “comprehensive”, “including all extremes” and “not excluding any section of the society”.

It may be recalled that prior to 2002, there was no law dealing with anti trust issues. The competition Act, 2002 was enacted to respond it as well as to fulfill India’s obligation under the WTO agreement. See, T. Ramappa, Competition Law In India: Policy, Issues and Developments, 2006.

Inclusive growth has been defined as productivity growth that is sustained over decades, is broad-based across economic sectors, creates productive employment opportunities for a great majority of the country’s working age population, and reduces poverty². Inclusive growth as the literal meaning of the two words refers to both the pace and the pattern of the economic growth³. The literature on the subject draws fine distinction between direct income redistribution or shared growth and inclusive growth. The inclusive growth approach takes a longer term perspective as the focus is on productive employment rather than on direct income redistribution, as a means of increasing incomes for excluded groups. Inclusive growth is, therefore, invented to be naturally sustainable as different from income division schemes which can in the undersized run decrease the disparities, between the two different ends of the society, which may have arisen on account of policies planned to a initiative start to the growth. At the same time as income distribution schemes can allow public, to benefit from economic growth in the short time, inclusive growth permit public to “contribute to and benefit from economic growth”. The scope of the inclusive growth is cleared from the above said definitions. The improvement of marginalized section has been a major objective of the framers of India. The five years plan primarily paying attention on the regional development of some backward states. These plans provide a huge level of financial assistance for the development of fiscal infrastructure in backward area. In this article highlight the direct and indirect impact of competition policy and law on development, growth and poverty reduction in society. ⁴

The Competition is vital to the manipulation of markets and supports modernization, an efficiency of production and growth, all of which produce prosperity and moderate poverty. But, market forces do not support the healthy efforts in competitive markets and affecting the interest of poor on largest scale. The large Companies and corporations with greater market power can perform monopoly, and it is generally understood that declining market competitiveness is dynamic income inequality. Hence, the aim of competition policy in the economy of a country is to ensure fair competition in the market by way of regulatory mechanisms. It is not planned to generate limitations or constrictions that may be lower to the growth of the society⁵. Competition policy has a significant and positive impact on growth and employment, and impacts on richer and poorer households in a different way and obstacles have essential redistributive sound effects that advantage the bankrupt society. Economist suggests that competition can have broad economic effects in three areas: the total amount of economic wealth available in the market at a given point of time, companies’ productive process, and their incentives to innovate or improve the quality of their products⁶.Many developing countries in the world now formulate growth in their national poverty elimination strategies because the effective competition is a central key to productivity. Competition policy should be an essential element of any pro-poor growth strategy.

India has made unprecedented economic and social progress since the start of post-liberalization reforms in early 1990. GDP per capita increased by an average annual rate of 5.2% between 1990 and 2015 and it is increase by 6.2% in 2016 and by 6.3% in 2017, making India the faster growing of all G20 economies. This strong economic growth has lifted more than 160 million people out of extreme poverty: the share of the population living in extreme poverty has declined from almost 50 percent in the early 1990s to around 20% today. With improved sanitation and health services, life expectancy increased from 58 years in 1990 to 68 year in 2014, where child mortality dropped by more than 50 percent⁷. India’s strong performance has been supported by major policy reforms. The change in the monetary policy framework aimed at boosting inflation expectations helped bring down inflation and stabilize the currency. Together with the current government’s efforts to liberalise and simplify investment regulations, this helped spur capital inflows. Recent efforts to create better jobs and raise the quality and relevance of the education and training system are crucial for more inclusive growth. Health outcomes have benefited from improved cleanliness and sanitation, as well as reduced water risks. It is significant to mention that competition policy should not be looked in separation but within the overall context of a country’s public policy objectives such as macroeconomic stability, the creation of employment opportunities, promotion of innovations and ensuring high standards of living. Regulation is an important tool to achieve these public policy objectives in a competitive environment to ensure a smooth functioning of democracy whose central function is to promote the social and economic welfare of its people⁸.

It has to be emphasized that a healthy competition policy is essential ingredient in economic reforms. Liberalisation, if not accompanied by competition laws and policy aimed at controlling economic behaviour and structures, can result in substantial price increases and reduced benefits for the overall economy. If monopolistic drafts are allowed to remain unchecked, price liberalisation will not be efficient. The same can be said of privatisation of state monopolies. Similarly opening markets for imports and FDI might bring enhanced competition, but if no safeguards exist, foreign firms might also engage in anti-competitive practices and abuse dominant market position. Hence, require for a strong and valuable competition law which endeavour to ban anti-competitive agreements and encourage behavior where there are certain remaining public benefits. This requires free from inhuman but fair and open competition that is possible only through the reasonable framework for competition policy and law. The aim of the planner is to show competition law as a director of inclusive growth that leads to sustainable prosperity. India’s Planning Commission in its mid-term review of the eleventh five-year plan (2007-2012) has adopted “Inclusive

Growth” as a guiding principle.

The post 1991 economic reform provides a superior responsibility to market forces and inspired competition in the Indian economy. As India has move steadily on the path of reforms it did away with the MRTP Act, 1969 as it was realized that the MRTP Act had outdated its utility; and control of size of enterprises was no longer appropriate to support the growth aspirations of the Indian economy.⁹

The objective of the Act is:

The Act prohibits anti-competitive practices which causes or are likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition within India. The Competition Act provides for the establishment of a quasi-judicial body, namely, the Competition Commission of India.

That any agreement which restricts the production, supply, distribution, acquisition or control of goods or provision of services, which causes or is likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition (AAEC) within India, is prohibited and void. Anti-competitive agreements may include Horizontal and Vertical Agreements.¹⁰ The adverse effect of the agreement on competition within India must be significant. It refers not to a particular list of agreements, but to a particular economic consequence, which may be produced by quite different sort of agreements in changeable time and circumstances. The words ‘adverse effect on competition’ involves acts, contracts, agreements or combinations which operate to the prejudice of the public interests by unduly restricting competition or unduly obstructing due course of trade. Public interest is the prime consideration. It does not necessarily mean only of the industry¹¹. It is not the nature of factum of trade restraint but it’s being injurious to the public interest which sought to be targeted. The restraint of trade is tolerable, if it is reasonable as to the public and the parties and limited to what is reasonably necessary. All agreements having adverse effect on competition are not prohibited. There can rarely be any agreement or contract among businessmen that does not directly or indirectly affect and possibly restrain commerce. In India, the basic method for an agreement to be anti-competitive is whether or not it causes or is likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition within India. In order to determine the adverse effects on competition, both the harmful and beneficial effects are to be considered¹².

Abuse of Dominant Position is an internal part of the mandate of modem competition authorities. For a developing countries dealing with competition authorities who are starting Competition Law enforcement as is the case in India, it is advisable “abuse of dominance” on a priority. The Act prohibits a dominant player from abusing its market power by either restricting competition or by imposing unfair terms and conditions on its customers. A company has a dominant position if it enjoys a position of economic strength (and market power) to behave independently of its competitors, customers, and consumers to an appreciable extent. In other words, dominant position is a position of strength enjoyed by a firm which enables it to behave/act independently of the market forces i.e. in the determination of price of the product. A dominant position in itself is not illegal. However, abuse of dominance is. Dominant companies have a special responsibility to behave responsibly. They have to comply with special rules that are designed to protect competitors, customers and market structure from abusive behavior.¹³

The Law of Competition in India seeks to ensure fair competition by prohibiting trade practices which cause appreciable adverse effect on competition in markets within territory of India. The words ‘adverse effect on competition’ embraces acts or behavior of an enterprise enjoying dominant position in the market.¹⁴ The Competition Commission considered the price is appropriate or below the full cost as Predatory Price, which is highly competitive in nature, such a price initially benefits the consumer by offering goods and services at lower price and when the players using such anti-competitive measure are able to eliminate competition, they start exploiting the customers.

The Dominant position has been defined to mean ‘a position of strength, enjoyed by an enterprise, in relevant market, in India, which enables it to:

The definition of the dominant position provided in the Competition Act is similar to the one provided by the European Commission in United Brand v. Commission of the European Communities¹⁵ case. In the United Brands case the Court observed that “a position of strength enj oyed by an undertaking which enables it to prevent effective competition being maintained on the relevant market by affording it the power to behave to an appreciable extent independently of its competitor, customers and ultimately of its consumers.

Combinations mean mergers, amalgamations of companies or acquisitions of control, shares, voting rights or assets of one company by another company or group. Good combinations lead to a more efficient business which passes on some of those efficiency savings to its customers. On the other hand, bad mergers lead to a situation where one or more businesses have the power to raise their prices to their customers. That is, they substantially lessen competition.¹⁶

Mergers attract the attentions of the competition policy makers because they generally have implications for the concentration of, and ability to use market power, which in turn, can impact negatively upon competition. Market power describes the ability of a business entity to act unconstrained by rivals and potential rivals in both price and non-price conduct. A Merger is bad, only if creates a dominant enterprise that subsequently abuses its dominance. To some extent the issue is related to that of agreements among enterprises and also overlaps with the issues of dominance. The reason that such a provision exits in most laws is to pre-empt the potential abuse of dominance where it is apparent, as subsequent unbundling can be both difficult and socially costly. Thus, the general principle, in keeping with the overall goal, is that mergers should be challenged only if they reduce or harm competition and adversely affect welfare. It is worth to note that, the Mergers impact upon the concentration and use of the market power lead to;¹⁷

Worthwhile to make competition regime unique and dynamic encouragement is required, from the top to the enforcement of the competition law. Competition advocacy is a process of outreach to influence the economic behavior of enterprises, bring out support for adhering to the principles of competition and convince the stakeholders about the innate advantages as a result of the fair competition¹⁸. Competition advocacy has two dimensions. First, as a proponent for increased public understanding and acceptance of competition principles, the second is, about the advisory role of the Commission. It reflects Commission’s role as advocate to government promoting such legislation and policies that follows the fair market principle and do not impose on the Competition.

After inquiry if contravention is established, the Commission may pass all or any of the following orders;

Main aim of the Competition Commission of India to Promote and maintain healthy competition as per the policy of Central Govt. and according to Public policy of the time. Market forces and financial policy of the Reserve Bank of India also play the vital role in betterment of the consumer. Consumer benefit is the ultimate object of the entire functionaries. Inclusive growth is an important public policy agenda for India’s democratic improvement and for that to open markets are to function powerfully; Competition Act has to have a close look at how trade, competition and regulatory policies can work in consistency with each other so as to ensure better entrepreneurship development leading to more participatory economic growth. in order to reflecting an inclusive process of economic and regulatory policy making so as to ensure better economic governance in the country by engaging multiple stakeholders (including state governments) in discussion and delivery. It is necessary to entrust the appropriate amount to competition policy to remove barriers to market access and motivate economic progress. To achieve the goal of inclusive growth, the mainstreaming Competition policy into the national development process by designing a benefit sharing instrument between various producers/exporters. In short, there should be sustainability impactful measurement in areas of economic, social and environmental improvements of major macroeconomic policies such as employment, competition and directive so as to understand and relevant factors benefiting or hindering the course and outcomes of inclusive growth in India.