KSLU Solved Question Papers
Competition Law
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 9
2025 Jun Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 9 Competition Law 2025 Jun Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2025 Jun examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2025 Jun examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2025 Jun examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 80 · 20 questions answered
Instructions printed on the paper
- N.B. (1) Answer all five Units. (2) One essay type question and short note/problems is compulsory from each Unit. (3) Figures to the right indicate marks. (4) Answer should be written either in English or Kannada completely.
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1
Unit I
(a)Explain the Constitutional provisions governing the trade and commerce under competition law.[10]
Answer
For full marks, cover: why the Constitution matters to competition law; the freedom of trade as a fundamental right and its limits (Articles 19(1)(g) and 19(6), including State monopolies), with equality (Article 14); the directive principles against concentration of wealth (Article 39(b) and (c)); freedom of trade throughout India (Articles 301 to 307) with Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd v. The State of Assam, The Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd v. The State of Rajasthan and Jindal Stainless Ltd v. State of Haryana; the legislative entries that support the Competition Act, 2002; a table.
Why the Constitution matters
Competition law regulates how people carry on trade. Every such law must fit the Constitution. The Constitution protects the freedom of trade and allows reasonable restrictions on it. It directs the State to prevent concentration of wealth. It also gives Parliament the power to legislate on monopolies and combines. The Competition Act, 2002 rests on all four.
1. Freedom of trade as a fundamental right
- Article 19(1)(g). Every citizen has the right "to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business".
- Article 19(6). The State may impose "reasonable restrictions" on that right "in the interests of the general public". Price controls, licensing and competition rules are restrictions of this kind.
- State monopolies (Article 19(6)(ii)). The State, or a corporation it owns, may carry on any trade "to the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens". This is why public sector monopolies were valid in the planned economy.
- Article 14. State action in trade, such as awarding licences or contracts, must not be arbitrary.
Narendra Kumar v. Union of India, AIR 1960 SC 430, decided on 3 December 1959, concerned the Non-ferrous Metal Control Order, 1958, which fixed maximum prices and required permits. The Supreme Court held that the principles for issuing permits had to be published and laid before Parliament as the Act required. Not having been, they could not be enforced. It also held that a restriction under Article 19(6) may even amount to a total prohibition. But the greater the restriction, the stronger the justification needed.
2. Directive principles against concentration
Article 39(b) directs the State to distribute "the ownership and control of the material resources of the community" to "subserve the common good". Article 39(c) directs it to ensure that "the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment". The MRTP Act, 1969 repeated these words in its Statement of Objects. The Competition Act, 2002 serves the same goals by banning cartels and abuse of dominance and by reviewing large combinations.
3. Freedom of trade throughout India (Part XIII)
- Article 301. "Trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the territory of India shall be free", subject to Part XIII.
- Article 302. Parliament may impose restrictions "as may be required in the public interest".
- Article 303. Neither Parliament nor a State may, by an entry on trade and commerce, prefer one State over another. Only Parliament may do so, to deal with a scarcity of goods.
- Article 304. A State may tax goods from other States without discriminating against them (clause (a)). It may impose reasonable restrictions in the public interest, with the President's previous sanction for the Bill (clause (b)).
- Article 305 saves existing laws and laws on State monopolies, and Article 307 lets Parliament appoint an authority for these articles.
Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd v. The State of Assam, 1961 AIR 232, decided on 16 August 1960, concerned an Assam tax on tea and jute carried by road and waterway. By majority, the Supreme Court held that the tax directly restricted the movement of goods. It violated Article 301 and, lacking the President's sanction under Article 304(b), was void. The Court said trade must flow "smooth and unhampered".
The Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd v. The State of Rajasthan, 1962 AIR 1406, decided on 9 April 1962, softened that view. A motor vehicles tax on buses using Rajasthan's roads was upheld. Regulatory measures and compensatory taxes for the use of trading facilities do not hamper trade but facilitate it.
Jindal Stainless Ltd v. State of Haryana, (2017) 12 SCC 1, decided by nine judges on 11 November 2016, settled the law on entry taxes. By majority, it held that taxes simpliciter are outside Part XIII, and only discriminatory taxes offend Article 304(a). It rejected the compensatory tax theory and overruled Atiabari and Automobile Transport to that extent. The majority also stressed that Part XIII must preserve the balance between the Union and the States.
4. Legislative power behind competition law
List III, Entry 21 covers "Commercial and industrial monopolies, combines and trusts". List I, Entry 42 covers inter-State trade and commerce. List II, Entry 26 covers trade within a State, subject to List III, Entry 33. Parliament enacted the MRTP Act and the Competition Act within these fields.
The provisions at a glance
| Provision | What it does for competition |
|---|---|
| Article 19(1)(g), 19(6) | Freedom to trade, subject to reasonable restrictions and State monopolies |
| Article 14 | Fairness in State dealings with traders |
| Provision | What it does for competition |
|---|---|
| Article 39(b), (c) | Directs the State to prevent concentration of wealth |
| Articles 301 to 307 | Free trade across India, with permitted restrictions |
| List III, Entry 21 | Power to legislate on monopolies, combines and trusts |
Conclusion. The Constitution protects the freedom of trade but allows reasonable restrictions in the public interest. It directs the State against concentration of wealth and gives Parliament the power to legislate on monopolies and combines. Part XIII keeps trade free across the country, as shaped by Atiabari, Automobile Transport and finally Jindal Stainless. The Competition Act, 2002 is a reasonable restriction of this kind, made to keep markets free and fair.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 9 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.