New Delhi: Bike-taxi riders in Karnataka are refusing to tone down their protests against the government’s “inaction” in notifying the relevant guidelines under Section 93 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which vests full authority to the states to issue permits and define the terms of ‘contract carriages’.
Contract carriages are essentially motor vehicles that carry passengers “for hire or reward”.
The protests come in the aftermath of the state government’s “inaction” in formulating a proper policy or framework after the Karnataka High Court passed an order on 2 April, directing bike-taxi aggregators like Uber and Rapido, to cease operations from 16 June onwards, until a framework is brought in place.
“The state government is called upon to ensure that all bike-taxi operations are stopped after these six weeks,” Justice B.M.Shyam Prasad had ruled.
The court’s order impacted not just urban mobility, and the gig economy, but also the lives of lakhs of riders, commuters, and bike-taxi owners. This ban and the crackdown on riders led to somewhat unusual and covert consequences such as people resorting to booking themselves as a package, or “bike parcel” for delivery—a service offered by Rapido, while others like Uber and Ola offered these services till midday, and not after.
On Wednesday, women commuters informed a bench of Acting Chief Justice (ACJ) Kameswar Rao, and Justice C.M.Joshi that they opposed the ban, saying that bike-taxis are a safe, convenient and affordable option for them.
On behalf of woman commuters, senior advocate Jayna Kothari said that all aggregator rules and guidelines show that bike-taxis are “a much safer mode of commute”, adding that states like West Bengal have regulations like limited plying of bike-taxis at night, and others like Rajasthan have markers like pre-qualification and background checks.
In a nutshell, their contention is that bike-taxis are cheap, safer than other modes of transport and a fundamental right of working women. The argument assumes significance in the backdrop of Karnataka cancelling bike-taxis on grounds of women’s safety. Additionally, the women also brought up the point that several bike-taxi riders are females.
Senior advocate Uday Holla, who appeared for Rapido, told the court that earlier states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu had banned bike-taxis but eventually permitted them, adding that there has been an 18 percent increase in congestion since the stop on bike-taxis.
Apart from the women commuters and aggregators, several bike-taxi associations also challenged the HC’s April order.
How bike-taxi apps, welfare associations are hit
Rapido submitted that its model offers more environmental and health benefits, while reducing the problem of parking and traffic congestion. It reduces construction and maintenance costs, overall consumption of fuel and leads to an additional income for motorcycle riders, the aggregator added.
Contending that the government’s conduct suffers from arbitrariness in multiple ways such as punishing citizens without a framework and the rejection of its application without reason, it argued that such unequal treatment of riders and bike-taxi owners affects their rights to equality, life and freedom of trade, under Articles 14, 21 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
Last Wednesday, the bike-taxi welfare association informed the HC that over six lakh people were affected due to the bike-taxi ban in Karnataka. “As of date, there are over 6 lakh people who have not only been affected but also hit hard as a result of the ban,” senior advocate Shashank Garg told the bench headed by ACJ Rao.
Terming bike-taxis as a concept that emerged in the last few years, following the influx of cab platforms, Garg said Bengaluru was grappling with traffic jams and called for the urgent need for a system offering “last-mile connectivity”.
“These bike-taxis are a necessity in easing traffic congestion, not a luxury,” he said, adding that they offer flexible employment opportunities and reduce the overall number of cars on the road.
Senior advocate Dhyan Chinnappa, who appeared for two bike owners, argued that although policy decisions should not be interfered with, the power of judicial review kicks in if such a decision is “arbitrary”.
On 6 March 2024, the government withdrew the Karnataka Electric Bike Taxi Scheme, 2021, which enabled e-bike-taxi businesses to operate under a license subject to certain terms and conditions. Chinappa urged the court to reinstate the earlier position.
The bike owners contended that the state cannot violate their right to trade under Article 19 (1) (g), which guarantees the fundamental right to all citizens to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade, or business, subject to reasonable restrictions.
Acknowledging the hardships faced by ride-sharing companies, gig workers and commuters, Congress MLA and lawyer Darshan Dhruvanarayana said that the bike-taxi operators sought an extension of the deadline to cease operations, citing the representation made to the government for a new bike-taxi policy like other states.
“Among the reasons given by them for seeking this additional time, the operators emphasised the need to make alternative arrangements for the large number of bike-taxi riders. Rapido alone claims to have around 6 lakh bike-taxis registered in Karnataka,” he told ThePrint.
Govt reluctance to frame policy
The ban on bike-taxis stemmed from a set of connected petitions before the HC, which were taken up by Justice Prasad on 2 April.
The petitioners, including Uber, Roppen Transportation Services, popularly known as Rapido, and ANI Technologies, operating as Ola, had sought similar directions to the state government to allow the permit registration of motorcycles as transport vehicles, grant them appropriate carriage permits for bike-taxis and implement a regulatory framework for bike-taxi operators.
Significantly, the April order specified that bike-taxis cannot operate unless the government notifies relevant guidelines under Section 93 of the MV Act, and frames appropriate rules under it. States have the full authority to issue permits and define the terms of ‘contract carriages’ under Section 93.
In June, Rapido, along with other aggregators, challenged the April ruling, saying that its carrying bike operations in 10 states, including Delhi, Gujarat, Punjab, and Rajasthan. It further argued that in 2019, the HC held that motorcycles used for hire carrying one passenger fall within the definition of ‘transport vehicle’ under Section 2(47) of the MV Act.
This order has not only affected the commuters, but also riders, and aggregators like Uber, Ola and Rapido, among lakhs of people. “The time to find a ride has tripled since the bike-taxi ban, and the traffic has not decreased at all. I’ve already had to walk home from the office on one instance, since the ban, and the streets of Bellandur are not exactly walkable given the barely existing pavements,” Bengaluru-based product specialist Gabriella D’Souza told ThePrint.
Also Read: At the centre of a plea against bike-taxi app Rapido, the fight for equal access to digital services
Origin & basis of the ban
In its April order, the HC noted that the transport department cannot be compelled to register motorcycles as transport vehicles or issue a contract carriage permit for bike-taxis without a proper regulatory framework in place.
In doing so, it referenced a 2019 report of an expert panel, which assessed the impact of bike-taxis on traffic and safety, while suggesting that such vehicles shouldn’t be allowed in Bengaluru.
Elaborating this report, Nirupan Gowda, an advocate at the Karnataka HC, told ThePrint, “In 2018, an expert committee was constituted by the government, which came out with a report in 2019, that spoke of pollution emanating from bike-taxis, and pointed to the abundance of alternative transport options. Despite this, however, the state government came out with its Electric Bike-Taxi Scheme in 2021.”
Three years later, the scheme was withdrawn owing to multiple violations, confrontations between auto drivers and bike-taxi riders, and women’s safety concerns, Gowda said. “The learned single-judge has rightly pointed out that it is under the Karnataka government’s ambit to come out with such a framework, given that it’s a policy decision.”
The situation elsewhere & SC’s stance
In February 2023, the Delhi transport department issued a public notice banning the use of two-wheelers for carrying passengers on hire but this was challenged by the bike-taxi aggregators, among others, before the Delhi High Court, which in turn stayed the operation of the ban in May.
The Delhi government told the HC that two-wheelers were being facilitated by aggregators, without proper licence or permit, and that plying of such non-transport vehicles for hire or reward violated their registration conditions.
Significantly, the government had expressed its intention to consider a policy for giving licenses to two-wheelers and four-wheelers.
In July 2023, the Supreme Court hit pause on the HC order, which effectively permitted these bike-taxis from operating in Delhi. “We accordingly direct permanent stay on operation of the impugned orders, which were interim in nature,” the SC ruled, adding that after the formulation of a policy, each application for licence in respect of such two-wheelers, would be dealt with in a time-bound manner.
Three months on, the Delhi government approved a scheme for bike-taxis, but with a catch—that only electric bike-taxis would operate, under conditions such as compulsory training of drivers whose monthly ratings averaged below 3.
Similarly, Maharashtra came up with e-bike-taxi rules in May, specifying that these taxis must operate below the speed of 60 km per hour, and cannot operate during heavy rain or storm conditions.
Can bikes be used as taxis?
A ‘contract carriage’, under Section 2(7) of the MV Act, has been defined as a motor vehicle which carries a passenger or passengers ‘for hire or reward’ and is engaged under a contract, either expressed or implied, for the use of such a vehicle as a whole for the carriage of passengers. Such contract carriages can only operate after a permit is issued by the authorities, and bike-taxis fall under this definition.
In 2004, the Centre issued a notification under the MV Act, which allowed for motorcycles to be used for hire “to carry one passenger on pillion”, but in the absence of a proper regulatory framework.
Significantly, on 1 July, the Centre notified the Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines, 2025, which allow for the use of non-transport or private motor cycles, for transporting passengers through aggregators, among others.
However, Clause 23 of the guidelines makes it clear that Karnataka government can allow “non-transport motorcycles for journey by passengers as shared mobility through aggregators resulting in reduced traffic congestion and vehicular pollution.” In fact, these latest guidelines also encourage states to opt for such a move, while citing reasons like affordable passenger mobility, hyperlocal delivery, and creating livelihood opportunities.
Expert view
“The MV Act, enacted by Parliament, recognises a bike as a transport vehicle. Once a vehicle is classified as a transport vehicle to ply as a taxi, it needs to be issued a permit. Issuance of permits is under the state’s domain, but it can’t refuse them,” advocate Nishanth A.V., who appeared for Rapido, told ThePrint.
“In this case, however, the applications are being made and the state government is orally refusing to give permits, in the absence of any executive order or announcement.”
Although bikes are classified as transport vehicles, they are being denied the permits, Nishanth said.
Pointing to a 2021 order passed by a bench of Justices B.V.Nagarathna and J.M.Khazi, Nishanth added that the Karnataka HC had specified that permits have to be issued as long as applications were being made.
Explaining how aggregators like Rapido are just platforms that link riders to consumers, Nishanth said that in this case, they are being opposed by the government and auto rickshaw unions, owing to frequent disputes between the auto and bike-taxi unions.
“If the state cannot curtail the law and order, they cannot deny the rights of people,” he said, adding that all other states have recognised bike-taxis, and that 16 states have even notified the rules and regulations in this regard.
The Karnataka government is aware that the ban has significantly impacted the livelihoods of thousands of gig workers, Congress MLA Dhruvanarayana said. “Transport Minister Ramalinga Reddy has also indicated that the government is reviewing the order and will work on developing guidelines for bike-taxis.”
The government, he added, is also deliberating the need for specific regulatory frameworks for new business models, to find the right balance between promoting innovation and ensuring public safety, and also take into consideration the significant implications for urban mobility, the gig economy and the evolving landscape of technology-enabled transportation services in India.
“The government hopes to have a regulation in place that takes into consideration the emerging technology-enabled mobility solutions and the appropriate regulatory frameworks to ensure the safety of drivers and commuters alongside compliance and fair competition among the aggregators,” the Congress MLA asserted.
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: Bengaluru bike taxi riders fear more attacks on fraternity as govt flip-flop leaves them stranded