The Delhi High Court on August 25 sought the response from the Competition Commission of India (CCI) on a plea by TLG India, the Indian arm of Publicis Groupe, seeking directions to the competition watchdog to furnish documents relating to the alleged cartelisation in the advertising sector [TLG India Vs Competition Commission of India].
Justice Sachin Datta asked the CCI to clarify which legal entity is under investigation.
The judge observed that when large corporate groups are investigated, a specific entity must be identified for the purpose of proceedings.
During the hearing, CCI, represented by Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta, argued that TLG India is not a party to the investigation and therefore, cannot seek inspection of case records. When the Court asked whether this submission may be recorded, the CCI counsel sought time to file a detailed reply. The CCI representative also said they did not have a copy of the prima facie order, prompting the Court to direct its production at the next hearing.
TLG’s plea asserted that the investigation is fundamentally flawed because it targets “Publicis Groupe,” which is not a legal entity either in India or France.
The petition highlighted that unlike other global advertising groups such as WPP, Omnicom, Havas and Dentsu, each of which has been named through their registered local subsidiaries, the CCI has failed to properly identify the relevant Publicis entity.
This omission renders the probe invalid under the Competition Act, 2002, it was contended.
The petition also challenged the CCI’s refusal to grant TLG India access to case records, including the prima facie order.
According to the company, despite repeated applications and follow-ups since March 2025, it has been denied inspection of the files for more than four months even as other parties have been allowed such access. This violates principles of natural justice and undermines its ability to prepare a defence, TLG argued.
TLG stressed that it is not seeking a stay of the investigation or questioning CCI’s jurisdiction but only requesting that a legal entity be properly identified as the respondent as has been done with other agency groups.
The Court granted CCI two weeks to file its reply and also directed that the prima facie order be placed on record for its perusal.
TLG was represented by Senior Advocate Ritin Rai with Advocates Avaantika Kakkar, Partner (head - competition) Aman Singh Baroka, Principal Associate, Varun Singh, Associate and Pushkar Singh, Associate from Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas.
CCI was represented by Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta and advocates Saurabh Chadda, Rohit Bhagat, Vikramaditya Sanghi, Pragyesh Pratap Singh and Aprajita.
Read Order