Supreme Court Stays High Court Order, Suspending Bike-Taxi Services by Rapido and Uber in Delhi
Introduction
The bike-taxi services provided by aggregators Rapido and Uber in the national capital, Delhi, will remain suspended for now, following a Supreme Court decision to stay the High Court order. The Delhi High Court had previously granted permission for the aggregators to operate in the city and instructed the Delhi government not to take any coercive action against them until a new policy was formulated. However, the Supreme Court’s stay order has put a hold on the services provided by Uber and Rapido’s bike-taxi services in Delhi.
Supreme Court’s Decision
A vacation bench comprising Justices Aniruddha Bose and Rajesh Bindal granted the two aggregators the liberty to request an urgent hearing of their plea by the Delhi High Court. The Supreme Court heard two pleas filed by the Delhi government against the High Court order that allowed Rapido and Uber to operate in the national capital until the administration notified the final policy on the plying of two-wheeler non-transport vehicles.
Delhi High Court’s Order
On May 26th, the Delhi High Court issued a notice to the Delhi government regarding Rapido’s plea challenging a law that excludes two-wheelers from being registered as transport vehicles. The High Court directed that no coercive action should be taken against the bike-taxi aggregator until the final policy was notified. Rapido also challenged a show-cause notice issued by the city government, arguing that it violated fundamental and constitutional rights and was passed without adhering to the principles of natural justice.
Delhi Government’s Warning
Earlier this year, the Delhi government issued a public notice cautioning bike-taxis against operating in Delhi. The notice warned that violations would make aggregators liable for a fine of up to ₹1 lakh.
Implications and Controversies
The suspension of bike-taxi services by Rapido and Uber in Delhi has raised several implications and controversies. Proponents of these services argue that bike-taxis offer affordable and convenient transportation options, particularly for short-distance travel. They can help reduce traffic congestion and provide a source of income for individuals with two-wheelers.
However, opponents of bike-taxi services raise concerns regarding safety regulations, insurance coverage, and potential exploitation of riders. They argue that these services operate in a regulatory gray area, as two-wheelers are not currently classified as transport vehicles in Delhi. The absence of a specific policy for bike-taxis has resulted in legal battles and conflicting decisions by different courts.
The Delhi government’s pleas against the High Court order indicate its intention to formulate a comprehensive policy that addresses the operation of bike-taxis and ensures the safety and welfare of both riders and passengers. The Supreme Court’s decision to stay the High Court order reflects the need for a clearer regulatory framework before allowing these services to operate without restrictions.
Conclusion
The suspension of bike-taxi services by Rapido and Uber in Delhi, as a result of the Supreme Court’s stay order, highlights the ongoing legal and regulatory challenges surrounding these services. While bike-taxis offer potential benefits in terms of affordability and convenience, ensuring the safety and well-being of riders and passengers remains a significant concern. The Delhi government’s decision to seek a comprehensive policy demonstrates its commitment to addressing these issues and establishing a framework that balances the interests of all stakeholders involved. The resolution of this matter will have implications not only for the bike-taxi services in Delhi but also for the larger debate surrounding the regulation of emerging transportation technologies.
