The Commission and the Director General Compared

The Commission and the Director General are parts of one institution with separate functions. The Commission forms opinions, directs investigation, hears the parties and passes orders. The Director General investigates when directed, and reports. He cannot begin an investigation of his own motion, and he cannot decide anything. The relationship is one of direction and report, and understanding it explains most of the procedural law under the Act, including why a direction to investigate is not appealable and why the rights of a party attach only when the report is considered.

1. The Comparison

Basis	The Commission	The Director General
Constitution	Section 7, with a Chairperson and not less than two and not more than six Members appointed under Sections 8 and 9	Section 16, appointed by the Commission with the prior approval of the Central Government after the amendment of 2023, with Additional, Joint, Deputy and Assistant Directors General
Function	To inquire, to decide and to pass orders	To assist the Commission by investigating and reporting
Initiative	May act suo motu, on information or on a reference under Section 19(1)	None; acts only on a direction under Section 26(1)
Powers	Section 36: the powers of a civil court as to summoning, discovery, evidence on affidavit, commissions and public records	Section 41: the same powers, together with the powers of investigation under the company law, including search and seizure on the authorisation of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
Output	Orders under Sections 26, 27, 28, 31, 33 and 48	A report of findings, which is a recommendation
Binding effect	Orders bind, subject to appeal	The report binds nobody, including the Commission

2. How They Work Together

The Commission takes cognisance under Section 19(1), on information, on a reference or suo motu.
It forms a prima facie opinion under Section 26(1) and directs the Director General to investigate. Competition Commission of India v. Steel Authority of India Ltd., (2010) 10 SCC 744 holds that this is an administrative direction requiring no notice or hearing, and that it is not appealable.
The Director General investigates, exercising the powers in Section 41 and requiring information from the parties and from third parties, with Section 43 penalising non-compliance.
He submits a report. Under Excel Crop Care Ltd. v. Competition Commission of India, (2017) 8 SCC 47 he is not confined to the specific allegations in the information; the direction is to investigate the matter, and a continuing course of conduct may be reported on.
The Commission considers the report, supplies it to the parties, invites objections, hears them and decides. It may differ from the report in either direction, and may direct further investigation.

⚠ Investigation and adjudication in one institution

In a criminal proceeding the investigator and the judge belong to different institutions. Under this Act they do not, and the objection that the same body investigates and decides is made regularly. The scheme answers it by sequence rather than by separation: the prima facie opinion is administrative and decides nothing; the investigation is conducted by an officer who has no power to decide; the report is disclosed to the parties, who may object to it; and the Commission hears them before any adverse order, with an appeal to a judicial tribunal thereafter. The appointment of the Director General by the Commission since 2023 has been criticised for bringing the two closer, and defended as removing executive influence over investigations.

3. Points Frequently Tested

The Director General cannot start a case. Every investigation begins with a direction under Section 26(1).
He cannot impose a penalty or make a finding that binds. His report is a recommendation, and the Commission is free to reject it.
His powers of search and seizure are real but supervised, requiring the authorisation of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate.
A party cannot appeal against being investigated. The remedy, if any, is the writ jurisdiction, and courts are reluctant to interfere at that stage.
Natural justice attaches at the report stage. The party must receive the report and be heard before an adverse order, which is the principal procedural protection the Act contains.

4. Related Topics and Provisions

Topic or provision	Connection
The Competition Commission of India	Constitution, duties and powers
Inquiry and Investigation: Sections 19 and 26	The stages of a case
Competition Commission of India v. Steel Authority of India Ltd.	The character of a Section 26(1) direction
Sections 16, 19, 26, 36, 41 and 43, Competition Act, 2002	The provisions relied on here