Either everyone is allowed to ply or everybody stops: Bombay High Court To State Govt On Bike Taxi License Policy

Either everyone is allowed to ply or everybody stops: Bombay High Court To State Govt On Bike Taxi License Policy
X

The High Court raps state government for not coming up with a policy for bike taxis and directed government to submit a list of bike taxi aggregators.

The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Justice GS Patel and SG Dige on Tuesday pulled up the Maharashtra State Government for not taking a decision with respect to policy for the bike taxi aggregator.

The Court was hearing a plea filed by Roppen Transportation Services Limited against the letter written to them by the State Government denying them to ply services in Pune and Maharashtra. The High Court opined that there should be comprehensive policy for all the bike taxi aggregators.

Advocate General Dr. Birendra Saraf submitted to the High Court that bike taxis are not allowed to ply without a license and that the government has issued notice to one of the aggregators for plying services without a license.

The bench expressed its displeasure while noting that the Government was not clarifying when it would come up with a state policy.

The court said,

“How can you refuse for want of policy or guidelines? You may refuse it on any other ground but this. You cannot keep it hanging like this on fire. You have to take a decision even if it is on a temporary basis”

The bench further suggested that the state government may not issue a blanket policy for the whole state but it may allow plying of such services in a few parts and disallow them in a few parts of the state.

The Court then asked the government to submit a list of bike taxi aggregators and said that:

“There has to be a comprehensive policy equal to all. Every company has to be on the same page. Either everyone is allowed to ply or everybody stops. In the absence of policy or safety guidelines, no such service should be allowed to ply”.

During the earlier hearings, Senior Advocate Aspi Chinoy had submitted that there is a similar company providing exactly the same service however the other company is allowed to operate since there is a status quo order of the Supreme Court.

In its earlier order, the court had noted that,

“We expect that these will be made subject to certain safety requirements that must be followed but that is hardly a reason for rejecting the entire proposal in this fashion. Outside Mumbai, and in fact even in the northern suburban of Mumbai, two wheeler transport is by far the norm and is a matter of great convenience. We see no reason why the Government should not seriously consider the proposal”.

Case Title: Roppen Transportation Services Pvt Ltd & Anr vs State of Maharashtra & Ors

Next Story