ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

Articles by A N OzaSubscribe to A N Oza

Integrated Entrepreneurship Development-Programmes-The Indian Experience

Programmes The Indian Experience A N Oza This paper examines the Indian experience of developing entrepreneurship via the Integrated Entrepreneurship Development Programme (EDP). The author highlights the reasons for the low priority assigned to developing entrepreneurs during the first two decades of development planning, the problems of financing small industries which led to the introduction of EDPs in Gujarat in the 1970s and the extension of EDP activity in the country during the 1980s. The content of the generally accepted Integrated EDP is outlined. In addition, the problems facing EDP activity are discussed and remedial measures are outlined.

Recent Amendments to the MRTP Act

The government has fought shy of implementing the recommendations of the Sachar Committee on amending the MRTP Act. This is not altogether surprising.

Committee on Company Law and MRTP Act-Exercise in Futility

Committee on Company Law and MRTP Act Exercise in Futility A N Oza The objectives, scope and machinery for implementation of the Companies Act and the MRTP Act are very dissimilar. It is difficult to understand, therefore, why the government should have entrusted the task of reviewing both these Acts to the same Committee.

Curbing Concentration of Economic Power-A Critique of the New Licensing Policy

A Critique of the New Licensing Policy A N Oza FOLLOWING the recommendations of the Industrial Licensing Policy Inquiry Committee (Dutt Committee), industrial licensing policy was very .substantially revised in February 1970, primarily with a view to circumscribing the role of large business houses. However, in February this year licensing policy was again revised in such a manner as to materially dilute the effects of the polity introduced three years ago. That in a matter of three years the government should have developed cold feet about striking at the roots of the growth of big business shows how unsure and insincere it is about controlling the growth of big business houses so as to more widely distribute the opportunities for growth in the private sector.

Futility of the Monopolies Commission

undertakings; and (3) control of restric- live trade practices operated by two or more firms through restrictive trading agreements. Of these, so far the Act has been administered primarily for the purpose of controlling concentration.

Dissecting the Joint Sector

of changes in estimates over those contained in the feasibility reports and delays in construction and commissioning of projects, even as procedures and methods have been insisted upon which would necessarily result in cost escalation and delays. The criticism has become more strident lately and now has come the move to change the policy itself and go back to turnkey arrangements with foreigners. To justify the change in policy, invidious comparisons are being drawn, without regard to the vastly different operational conditions in the two instances, between the time taken for putting up some of the plants in the private sector with foreign collaboration and that taken in building public sector plants. Particularly, the delay in the erection and commissioning of the Durgapur fertiliser project has been used as a handy weapon to decry the work of the FCI.

Restrictive Trade Practices

the Supreme Court to confine itself to references and arguments presented to it by the parties, as is evident from references such as that "we have not been shown any authority or principle..." (on the question of calculating depreciation), "we have not been shown anything..." (on the question of projected cost), and so on.

Putting Teeth into the Monopolies Act

Within the short period of one year it has become obvious that if the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act is to achieve the objectives for which it was enacted, some of its more important provisions will have to be amended and the procedure of its administration will need to be changed. That the need for these amendments should have become apparent in so short a time shows how unimaginatively and carelessly the Act had been drafted.

Making Monopolies Commission Irrelevant

Making Monopolies Commission Irrelevant AFTER a year of inactivity, the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC) seems to be flooded with work. Beginning with the reference to it of Century's expansion proposal, four other references have been made, all in a fortnight.

Monopoly and Public Policy

A N Oza LAST month some thirty to forty economists met in Bombay to discuss Monopoly and Public Policy at a three- day all-India seminar organised by the Centre for Advanced Studies in Economics of Bombay University. The seminar was held at least two years too late. The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act had already been passed a month earlier. And, considering the fact that there was a lapse of about three years between the introduction of the Bill in Parliament and its enactment, the academicians have woken up too late for their criticisms and suggestions to influence the anti- monopoly legislation. This once again confirms that our academicians prefer ex-post to ex-ante analysis of Government policies. No wonder then that, despite all their expertise, academic economists have failed to have much influence on economic policy or legislation. Having said that it must be added that it is nevertheless creditable that at least one university thought it fit to discuss problems of anti-monopoly legislation before the new Act is actually implemented.

Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act

The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act passed by Parliament incorporates all the amendments suggested by the Joint Select Committee of Parliament. None of the changes made by the Select Committee was of a basic nature. The majority of them related to definitions of terms and concepts; and, of these, only a few made any significant difference. For the rest, the three mast important changes made by the Committee were:

Monopolies and Restrictive Practices Bill

If the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Bill is firmly implemented, it will have far-reach- ing effects on the structure of private industry and trade. Yet the Bill has failed to elicit public discussion which is unfortunate because, enacted in its present unsatisfactory form, the legislation may fulfil its negative purposes without achieving the positive purpose of imparting dynamism to industries through fair and healthy competition.

Back to Top