Karnataka High Court Overturns State's Ban on Bike Taxi Operations
In a landmark verdict delivered on Friday, the Karnataka High Court in Bengaluru declared that the state's blanket prohibition on issuing contract carriage permits to motorcycles cannot be considered a reasonable restriction under Article 19(6) of the Constitution or the Motor Vehicles Act. A division bench of the court emphasized that this ban runs contrary to the legislative framework established by the Act, which is traceable to Entry 35 of List III of the Seventh Schedule.
Court Highlights Legislative Framework and Lack of Statutory Basis
The bench noted that the Motor Vehicles Act explicitly permits motorcycles to be treated as transport vehicles, contract carriages, and public service vehicles. It pointed out that there is no statutory rule, instrument, or notification prohibiting the registration of motorcycles as transport vehicles or the issuance of contract carriage permits for them. While the state government argued that the ban was a policy decision, the court observed that no policy or underlying considerations had been placed on record, and a complete ban attracts a higher degree of judicial scrutiny.
The judges stated that no credible material had been produced to substantiate the necessity of prohibiting bike taxi services. Interestingly, the court referenced the state government's own acknowledgment of the need for such services in the opening paragraphs of the electric bike-taxi scheme. It also recorded that the state did not dispute the contention that several congested areas in Bengaluru are not adequately served by public transport, and the need for last-mile connectivity remains undisputed.
Focus on Public Interest and Regulatory Compliance
The court clarified that the core issue before it was not whether bike taxis should be permitted, but whether they could be prohibited in the public interest. It noted that several other states, including Chandigarh, have issued permits for bike taxis, citing a communication from the Chandigarh Regional Transport Authority. This highlights a growing trend across India to integrate such services into urban mobility solutions.
On the regulatory front, the bench referred to Section 93 of the Motor Vehicles Act, which mandates licensing for aggregators. It held that aggregators cannot operate without a licence and noted that the central government's Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines 2025 (MVAG 2025) contemplate licences for bike-taxi aggregators, including motorcycles in the prescribed forms. This aligns with national efforts to standardize and regulate the burgeoning gig economy and transportation sector.
Interpretation of State Rules and Practical Implications
The court examined the Karnataka On-demand Transportation Technology Aggregators Rules, holding that since taxis include motorcycles, licensed aggregators are entitled to operate bike-taxi services, subject to furnishing vehicle details. Interpreting Rule 7 of the aggregator rules, the bench said that while a display board cannot be placed inside a motorcycle, the requirement should be understood to mean that permit and driver details must be accessible to passengers through digital or other means.
This verdict underscores the importance of balancing regulatory oversight with the constitutional rights of citizens and the practical needs of urban transportation. By striking down the ban, the court has paved the way for a more inclusive and efficient mobility ecosystem in Karnataka, potentially setting a precedent for other states grappling with similar issues.
