The Karnataka High Court on Thursday heard appeals filed by Rapido, Uber and Ola against a previous order that halted bike-taxi services in the state. The companies argued that the ban was excessive, while the State defended its decision by saying motorcycles cannot legally be used to carry passengers for hire, according to a Live Law report.
The hearing comes amid months of uncertainty for bike-taxi platforms in Karnataka. Earlier in August 2025, the High Court had granted the State one month to deliberate on framing a bike-taxi policy, observing that “lives are at stake.” The Court also reminded the government that it cannot completely prohibit trade and noted that 13 other states already regulate bike taxis.
Karnataka Argues Motorcycles Cannot Be Passenger Vehicles
At the hearing, Advocate General (AG) Shashi Kiran Shetty told the division bench that a “motorcycle cannot be a transport vehicle” under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. He submitted that the statutory definition does not allow its use “for carrying passengers or for hire” and added that the Act and Rules do not “envisage a motorcycle which could carry passengers.”
The Bench questioned this position by referring to Karnataka’s earlier Electric Vehicle (EV) policy, which had permitted e-bike taxis. The judges asked how the government could have issued such a policy if motorcycles were fundamentally barred from being used for transport. Shetty responded that the government later withdrew the policy, saying, “All I can say is that we have corrected ourselves.” He added that the State had only given EV bike taxis a temporary exemption and that permits are otherwise mandatory.
This legal debate also reflects a wider political divide in the State. Earlier, Karnataka’s IT Minister Priyank Kharge had publicly stated that a lack of policy should not “stifle innovation”, while Transport Minister Ramalinga Reddy held the opposite view, calling the use of white-number-plate bikes for commercial rides illegal.
Platforms Say They Are Ready for Permits; State Refuses
The Court noted that the companies were willing to apply for permits, but the State was refusing to issue any. Shetty clarified the government’s stance, saying, “We will not grant permits because a motorcycle is not a passenger vehicle for hire or reward.” When the Bench pointed out that the State was not citing reasons such as safety, congestion or pollution, the AG said the issue was one of regulation and that the government must decide, in “larger public interest”, whether motorcycles should operate as taxis.
Platforms have earlier countered this position in court, arguing that the State cannot block bike-taxi permits because the Regional Transport Authority (RTA), not the government, issues contract carriage permissions. Uber told the HC that if the law permits bike taxis, the State has no logical basis to stop aggregators from operating them.
This comes after…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
