Business To Ply Bike Taxis Protected Under Article 19(1)(g), State Can Impose Reasonable Restrictions But No Blanket-Ban: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on Friday (January 23) upheld taxi aggregators' right to business of plying bike taxis observing that it is a legitimate business protected under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, adding that a blanket-ban by the State is not a reasonable restriction under Article 19(6).In doing so the court set aside a single judge's order which held that bike taxis cannot operate in the State unless the government issues relevant guidelines and rules under the Motor Vehicles Act. Against this taxi aggregators like Uber, OLA, Rapido, motorcycle owners and welfare associations had moved the division bench in appeal. A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Joshi in its 111 page order held:"...it cannot be disputed that the business of plying taxis is a legitimate business, and the right to engage in such activity is protected under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The said business is not inherently dangerous, illegal or immoral...However, engaging in such business maybe subject to reasonable restriction under Article 19(6) of the Constitution of India, which expressly provides that Article 19(1)(g) does not prevent the State from making any law imposing reasonable restrictions in the interest of the general public...In our view, a blanket prohibition on issuing contract carriage permits to motorcycles cannot be considered as a reasonable restriction within the meaning of Article 19(6) of the Constitution of India for several reasons". State can impose restrictions but no blanket-banThe court said that the MV Act, in its pith and substance, relates to entry 35, List III Seventh Schedule which contemplates the subject of “mechanically propelled vehicles, including the principles on which taxes on such vehicles are to be levied.”"...it is not open for the State Government to enact any legislation which is repugnant to the MV Act. The provisions of the MV Act occupy the legislative field which is traceable to entry 35 of List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution...MV Act expressly contemplates the inclusion of motorcycles as transport vehicles. Plainly, it would not be open for the State Government of Karnataka to exclude motorcycles from registration as transport vehicles. The powers that can be exercised by the State Government are necessarily confined to those as provided under the MV Act, as the legislative field is occupied by the MV Act...blanket ban on the use of motorcycles as bike taxis is contrary to the scheme and provisions of the MV Act, permits inclusion of motorcycles as transport vehicles, contract carriages and public service vehicles."Referring to Section 67 MV Act which pertains to power of the State to control road transport, the bench said while the government has the power to issue directions but the power cannot be "unbridled or unguided". It has to be exercised having regard to "passengers' convenience, economically competitive fares, prevention of overcrowding and road safety".It further noted that the Government has the power to make a scheme for the transportation of goods and passengers however, the scheme has to be guided by factors such as last mile connectivity, rural transport, reducing traffic congestion, improving urban transport, safety of road users, the increase in the accessibility and mobility of people among others. The bench said that the government has the power to even modify a permit however it "would not be permissible for the State Government to issue a blanket ban prohibiting grant of permits to a class of transport vehicles". "Once it is accepted that the citizen has freedom to engage in legitimate trade and commerce and practice any vocation, the same cannot be restricted except by a valid law, which must satisfy the test of reasonableness and the condition of being in the interest of the general public, on the anvil of Article 19(6) of the Constitution of India. The scheme of the MV Act must be construed bearing the aforesaid in mind. Thus, while the Regional Transport Authority has the power to refuse a grant of permit under Section 74(1) of the MV Act, the said power must not ordinarily be exercised. Further, such refusal must be for reasons that must be communicated to the applicant in writing. A meaningful reading of Section 74(1) of the would indicate that it does not contemplate a blanket ban on the grant of permits to a class of transport vehicles". The court however said that as per Section 74 of MV Act, Regional Transport Authority is fully empowered to impose the conditions. The bench further said that there is no statutory rule, instrument or notification that prohibits the registration of motorcycles as transport vehicles or the issuance of contract carriage permits for motorcycles."The State contends that it is a policy decision. However, absent any set out policy and the considerations for the same, there are no grounds to assume that the same...

Business To Ply Bike Taxis Protected Under Article 19(1)(g), State Can Impose Reasonable Restrictions But No Blanket-Ban: Karnataka High Court

Malavika Prasad

Tags