'Livelihood Of 6 Lakh Families Affected By Bike Taxi Ban': Taxi Welfare Association Tells Karnataka High Court

The Taxi Welfare Association told the Karnataka High Court on Friday (July 25) that the bike taxi ban imposed in the state was affecting the livelihoods of almost 6 lakh families.

A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Joshi was hearing a plea moved by Bike Taxi Welfare Association and another party against the single judge's order, which had banned the operation of bike taxis in the state. Notably, appeals have also been filed by bike taxi aggregators Ola, Uber and Rapido against the single judge's order.

For context, the single judge had in April ruled that "unless the State Government notifies relevant Guidelines under Section 93 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rules thereunder, the petitioners (Ola, Uber, Rapido) cannot operate as Aggregators offering Bike-Taxi Services".

The court had further said that the State's Transport Department cannot be given directions to register Motorcycles as Transport Vehicles or issue Contract Carriage Permits. It had further ordered the State government to ensure that all bike taxi operations cease to operate in six weeks. This date was extended till June 15. Thereby, Bike Taxis were to cease operations from June 16 in the State.

Bikes can be registered as contract carriage as per the MV Act, which can't be sub-planted by an unwritten policy

Senior Advocate Dhyan Chinnappa, representing vehicle owners, submitted that a bike taxi is a transport vehicle with a contract carriage permit. Chinnappa said that the single judge had accepted this, yet stopped short of allowing them to operate as bike taxis.

Earlier the vehicle owners had argued that the relevant Aggregator Rules provide for onboarding of two wheelers and thus the ban prohibits them from registering their bikes and granting them contract carriage permits.

Chinnappa, meanwhile, argued that there's no government policy and only a statement was made by the State before the court that they wouldn't allow transport carriage to be used as a bike taxi.

He referred to a division bench judgment as per which "Contract carriage is an inclusive definition..includes motorcycle". 

"This judgement has become final. Has not been challenged by the state. Then we applied to consider our vehicles as transport carriages. Even if there is an unwritten policy, which has not been revealed before the court, it can't sub plant the provisions of the MV Act...If I'm a motor cab, I'm entitled to be treated as transport vehicle. I'm entitled to be registered under MV Act. Once registered, I can operate as contract carriage," the senior counsel said referring to definut

As the senior counsel referred to definitions of contract carriage, etc., under the MV Act, the court orally said that the vehicle owners' entitlement cannot come from definitions. "Let's see if you're entitled," the bench said. 

Owners are entitled to register bikes and ply as taxis, State's policy can't be against the law

"Central government has clarified that you must register motorbike as transport vehicles," the senior counsel said and referred to a memo issued by the Centre to the States stating that motor vehicles can be given carriage permit. 

"Sequitur to all this is that I'm entitled to get registered as a transport vehicle, register as a contract carriage and ply as a bike taxi. This has been the position since 2004," he added. 

He further referred to a report of the State Committee, which had suggested that bike taxis were not suitable for Bengaluru. 

Chinnappa, in a lighter vein, said, "This committee had the Director of Metro and BMTC. So there might've been larger interests".

"The strange thing is, if the State accepted this report, it came out with the e-bike taxi scheme after this. Which was later withdrawn," the senior counsel said. 

The court orally remarked that it may have been introduced to reduce carbon emissions. Chinnappa however, said it was not known what the State's policy is on bike taxis.

"Apart from the submission before single judge, there's nothing. Can there be policy contrary to statutory scheme? If the law allows motorcycle to be registered as taxis.. There's no discretion left to state to come with a policy saying exactly opposite of what the law says. State policy will be against the object of act. It'll be against the right to congregate and the right of individual to operate his vehicle as transport carriage. Once field is occupied by the statute, the States power also goes," he added. 

The court, however, said that the doctrine of the occupied field is not applicable here.

After hearing the matter for some time, the high court listed it for further hearing on August 5. 

Case title: BIKE TAXI WELFARE ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER v/s STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

WA 962/2025