"10. The scheme of the Act thus, does not permit investigation by Director General into any information which was not considered by the Commission, while forming opinion under sub-section (1) of Section 26 of the Act. The formation of opinion by the Commission and direction to cause an investigation to be made by the Director General being a pre-requisite condition for initiation of investigation, the Director General would have no power to undertake investigation in respect of the complaint which the Commission did not consider while forming an opinion and directing investigation by the Director General. If the Director General investigates an information which the Commission did not consider in the first instance, while forming opinion with respect to existence of a prima facie case, such an act on his part shall be ultra vires his power under the Act and, therefore, clearly illegal. It is settled legal proposition that when the provisions of a Statute requires an act to be done in a particular manner, such an act can be done only in the prescribed manner and not otherwise. Sicne the Act requires the Director General to investigate only such information which was considered by the Commission, while forming its opinion with respect to existence of a prima facie case, it cannot, of its own carry out investigation based upon an information which was not available to the Commission. It would be appropriate to note here that though MRTP Act, 1969 empowered the Director General to exercise suo motu power of investigation, the said power has been expressly denied to him under the Competition Act. In clause (5) of the State of Objects and Reasons for enacting the Competition Act, it is clearly stated that "the Director General would be able to act only if so directed by the Commission, but will not have any suo motu power for initiating investigation". If the Director General, is directed by the Commission to cause an investigation to be made into information 'X' and he, besides investigating information 'X' also investigates information 'Y'. which was not considered by the Commission, while directing investigation by him, that would amount to conferring suo motu, power of investigation upon the Director General which would clearly contravene the scheme of the Act, as far as investigation into complaint 'Y' is concerned".