Right To Ply Bike Taxis Arises From Fundamental Right To Trade, State Can't Take Away Permit Granted By MV Act: OLA To Karnataka High Court

In appeals by various bike taxi aggregators such as Uber India, Rapido and OLA against the single bench order which upheld the state government's ban on plying of bike taxis in the state, ANI Technologies (OLA) has told the Karnataka High Court that such a move by the state violates the aggregators' fundamental right to trade under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

Senior Advocate Arun Kumar appearing for the aggregator submitted that while the single judge found that it was correct that a motor bike can be registered and is entitled to a carriage permit, it was held that the state had taken a policy decision that it would not allow bike taxis.

"Our right stems from a fundamental right under Article 19 (1) (g)...the MV Act contemplates the delegation of certain things. If there is a guaranteed fundamental right under Article 19, can it be taken away? Subordinate legislation has to be in conformity with the statute. This restriction is not by the MV Act or rules made under it. Does the executive power extend beyond the statute?" Ola's counsel submitted.

Kumar submitted that the State cannot, by executive action, claim to have a larger right and override all these provisions, as that would be in contravention of the MV Act.

It was also submitted that under provisions of Law, there can be some restrictions framed, but if the MV Act permits registration and gives a permit, the State cannot disallow the operation of the same as it is in violation of the statute and constitutional guarantees.

"My submission is that if you make a rule and it takes away my right under MV Act it has to stand the test of reasonableness...The Central Govt policy permits motorcycles to be used as bike taxis and so on. It is contrary to what the state government is saying here," it was argued.

Referring to the interim order the counsel argued that my application to register the motorcycle as a transport vehicle was not considered and the State is not issuing carriage permits.

"Unless and until they are not doing anything how can the court come to our relief. That is where the interim order was passed to permit me to use the bike taxi in order to exercise my right under Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution."

Finally it was said that “A plain reading of aggregator rules, it permits motor vehicles including motorcycles to be aggregated. That is not in dispute at all.”

Similar submissions were made by counsel for another aggregator. It was contended, “The grant of permit is by the Regional Transport Authority and not by the state government. The object of MV Act is to promote transport and reduce license raj and not ordinarily reject grant of permit. State has no role, power or discretion to refuse grant of contract carriage permit.”

The court will continue hearing the appeals on Friday.