Ride-hailing service Uber on Monday told the Karnataka High Court that bike taxis were not only lawful but also served the public interest by helping ease congestion on roads and enabling efficient use of transport resources.
The counsel for Uber questioned the state government’s curbs on bike taxi services before a division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Joshi. The bench is hearing writ appeals from Ola, Uber, and Rapido against a single-judge bench’s order disallowing the operation of bike taxi services in the absence of a government policy.
He described the 34-page report submitted by the government to the bench that seeks a complete ban on bike taxis as a document drafted solely through internal discussions among officials, without any broader stakeholder consultation. Yet, the government was relying on it to justify its decision to ban bike taxis, he added.
The counsel for Ola argued that the aggregators merely provide a platform for bike taxis since the bike taxis have no designated stand to connect with passengers. Bike taxi operators cannot be compelled to stop working while they wait for a new policy to be framed, he added.
The counsel for bike taxi owners contended that bike taxi pilots were dependent on technology to connect with passengers, as there were no taxi stands. The Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, permitted bike taxis, and the state cannot ban the service, he added.
A bike taxi is a vehicle with contract-carriage permission and is therefore qualified as a transport vehicle, regardless of what it is called.
He disputed the state authorities’ interpretation of the law — that a bike may carry goods but not passengers — arguing that it contradicts an Act of Parliament. This, he said, was a case of existing transport operators trying to keep new entrants out of the business.
The court adjourned the case for further hearing.
The counsel for Uber questioned the state government’s curbs on bike taxi services before a division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Joshi. The bench is hearing writ appeals from Ola, Uber, and Rapido against a single-judge bench’s order disallowing the operation of bike taxi services in the absence of a government policy.
He described the 34-page report submitted by the government to the bench that seeks a complete ban on bike taxis as a document drafted solely through internal discussions among officials, without any broader stakeholder consultation. Yet, the government was relying on it to justify its decision to ban bike taxis, he added.
The counsel for Ola argued that the aggregators merely provide a platform for bike taxis since the bike taxis have no designated stand to connect with passengers. Bike taxi operators cannot be compelled to stop working while they wait for a new policy to be framed, he added.
The counsel for bike taxi owners contended that bike taxi pilots were dependent on technology to connect with passengers, as there were no taxi stands. The Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, permitted bike taxis, and the state cannot ban the service, he added.
A bike taxi is a vehicle with contract-carriage permission and is therefore qualified as a transport vehicle, regardless of what it is called.
He disputed the state authorities’ interpretation of the law — that a bike may carry goods but not passengers — arguing that it contradicts an Act of Parliament. This, he said, was a case of existing transport operators trying to keep new entrants out of the business.
The court adjourned the case for further hearing.