Supreme Court says Uber, Rapido bike taxis can't run in Delhi for now

The Delhi government in February banned all such operators from offering any bike-taxi services in the Capital under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The Supreme Court on Monday brought the operation of bike taxis in the Capital to a halt, staying Delhi high court orders that permitted aggregators to ply two-wheelers as taxis until the state government notifies pertinent regulations.

The Delhi government in February banned all such operators from offering any bike-taxi services in the Capital under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and also warned that riders found violating the rules will be fined up to ₹10,000 and even face suspension of licence for a minimum of three years. (Raj K Raj/HT Photo)

“In our opinion, an interim order staying the whole-scale operation of a statutory regime till the finalisation of policy was unwarranted and we stay both the impugned orders passed by the Delhi high court,” said a bench of justices Aniruddha Bose and Rajesh Bindal while disposing of the appeal by the Aam Aadmi Party government.

The bench, in its order, refrained from commenting on the merits of the arguments raised by Roppen Transportation Services Pvt Ltd’s Rapido and Uber India Systems Pvt Ltd, both of which offer two-wheeler services, noting that it is for the high court to finally decide all contentions after hearing parties, and that it was currently concerned only with the interim orders passed in May.

The bench granted liberty to the parties to approach the Delhi high court for early hearing.

The Delhi government in February banned all such operators from offering any bike-taxi services in the Capital under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and also warned that riders found violating the rules will be fined up to ₹10,000 and even face suspension of licence for a minimum of three years.

On May 26, the high court ruled that no coercive action should be taken against two bike taxi aggregators and its riders till the Delhi government notifies the necessary regulations under the Motor Vehicles Act. The interim order was to continue till August 22, when the high court is expected to take up the matter next. Staying the Delhi high court orders on Monday, the Supreme Court bench also recorded the statement of senior advocate Manish Vashisht, appearing on behalf of the Delhi government, who said that the policy governing the licencing regime of aggregators would be in place by the end of July.

The Delhi government pointed out that allowing private motorcycles to ply as taxis is in contravention of the Motor Vehicles Act and that the high court order did not specify the reasons while protecting the aggregators for the time being.

At the request of the senior counsels Neeraj Kishan Kaul and Siddharth Bhatnagar, representing Uber and Rapido, the bench also recorded in its order that that once the pertinent notification was in place, the Delhi government would deal with the applications of the aggregators in a time-bound manner, till guidelines governing grant of licences to such aggregators are notified.

During the proceedings, the Union government, represented through additional solicitor general Sanjay Jain, submitted that the Centre’s 2020 guidelines allow private two wheelers to be plied as transport vehicles if the aggregators comply with the norms. However, following the ASG’s request, the question as to whether the Motor Vehicles Act permits private owner of a two-wheeler to ply his vehicle commercially through an aggregator was left to be finally decided by the high court.

On June 9, the Court had sought the Centre’s stand on allowing bike-taxi aggregators to operate in Delhi after Uber and Rapido claimed that they should be allowed to operate under the 2020 guidelines of the central government. The aggregators further pointed out that since the Delhi government did not have any regulatory regime in place, they were required to comply only with the Centre’s guidelines.

During the proceedings on Monday, ASJ Jain clarified that the Centre’s 2020 guidelines were subject to the statutory regime that could be put in place by states as public transport is a subject within the jurisdiction of state legislature.

Appearing for the aggregators, senior counsel Kaul and Bhatnagar, on their part, contended that 2004 and 2020 guidelines by the central government allow both four and two-wheelers to operate as taxis. They also complained about the loss of livelihood of thousands of people if bike-taxis were to be stopped just because the Delhi government failed to come out with necessary regulations in the last four years.